Preamble

The House met at a Quarter before Three of the Clock, Mr. SPEAKER in the Chair.

PRIVATE BUSINESS.

Private Bills [Lords] (Substituted Bills),

Mr. SPEAKER laid upon the Table Report from one of the Examiners of Petitions for Private Bills, That in respect of the following Bills, introduced pursuant to the Provisions of the Private Legislation Procedure (Scotland) Act, 1899, and which the Chairman of Ways and Means had directed to originate in the House of Lords, they have certified that the Standing Orders have been complied with, namely:

Scottish Central Electric Power Bill [Lords] (Substituted Bill).

Fife Electric Power Bill [Lords] (Substituted Bill).

Lochaber Water Power Bill
[Lords] (Substituted Bill).

Provisional Order Bills (No Standing Orders applicable),

Mr. SPEAKER laid upon the Table Report from one of the Examiners of Petitions for Private Bills, That in the case of the following Bill, referred on the First Reading thereof, no Standing Orders are applicable, namely:

Severn Fisheries Provisional Order Bill

Bill to be read a Second time To-morrow.

Oral Answers to Questions — UNEMPLOYMENT.

TEXTILE INDUSTRY (AUTOMATIC LOOMS).

Sir NAIRNE STEWART SANDEMAN: 3.
asked the Lord Privy Seal in view of the agreement come to between the trade unions and the employers with regard to the use of automatic looms in
the cotton and artificial silk trades, what measure of financial assistance he will be prepared to advise in order to help employers with the cost of installation?

The LORD PRIVY SEAL (Mr. J. H. Thomas): As I informed the hon. Member for Pudsey and Otley (Mr. G. Gibson) on 28th January, it is for the leaders of the industries concerned to formulate proposals for re-organisation, but I shall, of course, be ready to co-operate.

Sir N. STEWART SANDEMAN: Do I understand that the right hon. Gentleman has made some arrangement with the banks, by which something might be done in reference to finance?

Mr. THOMAS: Yes, and those engaged in industry not only know it, but are availing themselves of it daily. The hon. Member, however, will quite understand that it would not be proper for me, across the Floor of the House, to name any particular mill or factory.

Mr. KIRKWOOD: In view of the fact that this question asks for assistance to employers, will the right hon. Gentleman have due regard to the fact that employés are going to be put out of work as a result of the operation of automatic looms—that they are asking in Lancashire that the weavers should operate eight looms, as against four before this was introduced?

EXPORT TRADES.

Rear-Admiral SUETER: 4.
asked the Lord Privy Seal which are the trades in which the effect of his plans to increase the export trade will be seen in the unemployment returns?

Mr. THOMAS: As I have repeatedly stated, the Government's policy is to encourage by every means possible the expansion of British trade both in home and in overseas markets, and with this object in view I am continuing my discussions with the representatives of industry in order that any steps which the Government can properly take to stimulate and facilitate trade shall be taken. The hon. and gallant Member will appreciate that a policy of this kind, which is calculated to have general results, cannot affect the unemployment figures immediately.

Mr. MANDER: Is the right hon. Gentleman yet in a position to make any statement with regard to assistance to the motor-car and motor-cycle export trade?

Mr. THOMAS: I am not yet able to indicate what precise steps are being taken, but I will go so far as to say that internal arrangements are being made by this; industry.

Sir NICHOLAS GRATTAN-DOYLE: May I ask the right hon. Gentleman if he is not impressed by the conversion of the hon. Member for East Wolverhampton (Mr. Mander) from the Free Trade point of view?

Mr. HANNON: Has the right hon. Gentleman taken into serious consideration the representations made to him the other day by representatives of the motor-cycle and motor-car industry?

Mr. THOMAS: I always treat very seriously representations made to me from all industries.

SCOTTISH WHOLESALE CO-OPEEATIVE SOCIETY (FOREIGN MACHINERY).

Sir KINGSLEY WOOD: 5.
asked the Lord Privy Seal, whether he can now state the result of his inquiries with reference to the recent purchase of German machinery by the Scottish Wholesale Co-operative Society?

Mr. THOMAS: My inquiries are not yet complete.

GOVERNMENT PROPOSALS.

Sir K. WOOD: 6.
asked the Lord Privy Seal whether he has any new Parliamentary proposals to communicate to the House, with a view to mitigating unemployment?

Mr. THOMAS: I am continuing to develop the policy outlined in the reply which I gave to the right hon. Gentleman on the 2lst January.

Sir K. WOOD: Is there any probability of anything definite coming, so far as new proposals are concerned, from the suggestions made by the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster and other Ministers?

CANADA (MINISTER'S VISIT).

Lieut.-Colonel JAMES: 7.
asked the Lord Privy Seal whether he has received the Report upon colonisation and employment opportunities in British Columbia
which, as a result of his visit to Canada, he was to receive from the Premier of British Columbia; and whether he proposes to publish this Report now or when received?

Mr. THOMAS: I have not yet received the full Report from the Premier of British Columbia.

Lieut.-Colonel JAMES: May I have an answer to the last part of the question, as to whether the right hon. Gentleman proposes to publish the Report?

Mr. THOMAS: I have not seen the Report, and, obviously, I could not talk about publishing something until I have seen it.

Sir ARTHUR STEEL-MAITLAND: Has the Lord Privy Seal any information as to the placing of the contract for five ships for the Canadian trade?

Mr. THOMAS: I informed the House, when I was last questioned, that I had received a letter from the builder, who informed me that they had reached the stage of completing a final contract. The right hon. Gentleman will be pleased to know that since that—in fact, this morning—I have received the first definite information of an order for 40,000 tons of coal to be shipped immediately from this country when the St. Lawrence is open. That is soft coal, in addition to the hard coal.

Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND: Would the right hon. Gentleman be good enough to reply to my question, which was as to whether the contract for these ships had been placed?

Mr. THOMAS: I have informed the right hon. Gentleman precisely as to the position, and I have nothing to add. The right hon. Gentleman, I think, was not in the House when I made my first intimation. I then informed the House that it was dependent upon definite contracts being obtained. This is the first time, although it has taken months to complete the negotiations, that I am in a position to say definitely that 40,000 tons, as a start, have been ordered.

Mr. BATEY: Could the right hon. Gentleman tell us from which district the 40,000 tons of coal are to be taken?

Mr. SPEAKER: Mr. Somerville.

Mr. BATEY: On a point of Order. I have asked a simple supplementary question, cannot I have an answer?

Mr. THOMAS: I hope to be in a position to tell the House definitely from what part of the country the coal will come, but I am not in a position to say definitely at this moment.

PUBLIC WORKS (GRANTS).

Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND: 9.
asked the Lord Privy Seal when the White Paper, which was promised for last week, stating the public works approved for grant by the Unemployment Grants Committee, may be expected; and whether the estimated cost, the amount of employment provided, and the degree of anticipation will be stated in each case?

Mr. THOMAS: The issue of this Paper has been postponed in order that particulars of certain schemes now under consideration might be included in it. I hope that it will now be issued early in March. As regards the last part of the question, the particulars given of schemes approved by the Unemployment Grants Committee will be on similar lines to those contained in the earlier Paper.

Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND: Cannot the right hon. Gentleman give us rather more specific information than is contained in the earlier Paper as to the three items mentioned in the last part of the question? I am sure that such information would be of interest to every Member of the House.

Mr. THOMAS: I will endeavour to give all the information that is possible in the White Paper.

METALLIFEROUS MINING INDUSTRY.

Mr. DUCKWORTH: 10.
asked the Lord Privy Seal whether he is aware of the amount of unemployment among metal miners, particularly in the tin mines of Cornwall and in the lead and barytes mines of Shropshire; and, in view of the schemes now being considered by the Government with a view to assisting other distressed industries, if he will take such steps as may be practicable to help the metalliferous mining industry in particular?

Mr. THOMAS: I am aware that there is some unemployment among men engaged in the metalliferous mines, and if
any practical suggestions are put forward to me to deal with this situation I shall be happy to consider them.

Mr. DUCKWORTH: In view of the negotiations which are taking place in regard to rationalisation, can the right hon. Gentleman give those in the industry any definite assurance of favourable consideration by the Government for any concrete schemes?

Mr. THOMAS: It would be absurd for me to make any offer in circumstances such as those of question and answer, without knowing anything of the proposals that were being submitted. In reply to the question on the Paper, I have said that, if any of these proposals are made, they will be considered, and beyond that I cannot go.

Mr. CHARLES WILLIAMS: Has the right hon. Gentleman yet begun to apply his mind to the question of the position of the tin mines in Cornwall, which is very important?

Mr. FOOT: Has the right hon. Gentleman had a request that he should receive a deputation representing the tin-mining industry of Cornwall, and is it likely that arrangements for receiving the deputation will be made soon?

Mr. THOMAS: I cannot remember having received such a request. There may be one in, but I have not yet seen it.

Mr. KELLY: Did not the right hon. Gentleman's officers receive a deputation the week before last, and are they not now considering the whole of the proposals?

PENISTONE.

Mr. RENNIE SMITH: 11.
asked the Lord Privy Seal whether Penistone, in view of the closing of the iron and steel works in that town, as part of the rationalisation of the iron and steel trade in that town may be classified as a distressed area and share in such facilities as are available for distressed areas?

Mr. THOMAS: My right hon. Friend the Minister of Labour has decided that, in the circumstances, the facilities that have been available to workpeople in certain depressed areas to enable them to take employment elsewhere shall be extended to the unemployed workpeople at Penistone.

Mr. SMITH: 13.
asked the Lord Privy Seal if he cam state the number of public works schemes in operation in the Division of Penistone, with details and the number of men employed; and the number of schemes at present under consideration, with details and the local authorities concerned?

Mr. THOMAS: I am having inquiries made and will communicate with my hon. Friend as soon as possible.

BOOT AND SHOE TEADE.

Captain AUSTIN HUDSON: 12.
asked the Lord Privy Seal whether there are any plans in his Department for the rationalisation of the Northampton footwear industry?

Mr. THOMAS: I would refer the hon. and gallant Member to the answer given yesterday by my hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster to the question addressed to him on this subject by the hon. Member for Grimsby (Mr. Womersley).

Captain HUDSON: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the Chancellor of the Duchy advocated rationalisation as a cure for the troubles of the footwear industry, and, if he has no plans, what does he intend doing about it?

Mr. THOMAS: I myself saw the representatives of this industry and heard the case presented and discussed many matters affecting the industry with them.

Mr. L'ESTRANGE MALONE: Is the right Ion. Gentleman aware that many people in the boot industry think it very necessary to start considering the future, and would it not have been a good thing if coal cotton, and other industries had started thinking before they got into their present parlous condition?

CANADIAN WHEAT AND BRITISH PRODUCTS (EXCHANGE).

Mr. ALBERY: 14.
asked the Lord Privy Seal if he can give the House any information concerning his recent discussions with representatives of the Canadian wheat pool?

Mr. THOMAS: My discussions with the wheat pool and with representatives of the millers chiefly concerned the possibility of securing greater regularity in the shipment of wheat during the St. Lawrence season in order that ships going out might quote a freight rate for
outward cargo based on the certainty of a return cargo. It was not found possible to make any definite agreement to this end, but I have every hope that these conversations will lead to a more regular exchange of Canadian wheat for British products.

Lieut.-Colonel HENEAGE: Are the interests of the English wheat producer being properly safeguarded?

HOURS OF WORK.

Mr. BUCHANAN: 45.
asked the Prime Minister if any inquiry is being conducted into the question of a general reduction of hours of labour in this country as a contribution towards easing the unemployment problem; and if any legislation is to be introduced in this direction and, if so, to what extent and When?

The PRIME MINISTER (Mr. Ramsay MacDonald): An inquiry of the kind referred to is not being conducted, and beyond the Bill in connection with the Washington Hours Convention and the Factories Bill, no legislation of this kind is at present contemplated.

Mr. BUCHANAN: Can the Prime Minister say when the Bill dealing with the Washington Convention is likely to be introduced?

The PRIME MINISTER: Questions about that have been answered again and again. It is awaiting an opportunity.

Mr. ALBERY: Can the right hon. Gentleman tell the House whether the negotiations with the National Union of Railwaymen have been completed?

Oral Answers to Questions — CINEMATOGRAPH FILMS ACT.

Mr. DAY: 15.
asked the President of the Board of Trade whether any of the Colonies or Dominions have notified his Department during the previous two years that they could not introduce legislation corresponding with the quota Clauses contained in the Cinematograph Films Act, 1927, and can he give particulars?

The PRESIDENT of the BOARD of TRADE (Mr. William Graham): No, Sir. If any such notifications have been made, they would have been addressed to the Secretary of State for the Colonies or to the Secretary of State for Dominion Affairs.

Oral Answers to Questions — COMPANY LAW.

Mr. MUGGERIDGE: 19.
asked the President of the Board of Trade if he will give a complete Return of those companies to whom exception has been granted from the obligations imposed by Sub-section (1) of Section 145 of the Companies Act, 1929, and the corresponding Section of the Business Names Act, 1916, giving particulars of the names, former and present, of all directors of such companies?

Mr. W. GRAHAM: I do not think that the value of the Return would justify the large amount of labour which its preparation would involve. I would remind my hon. Friend that full particulars of the name and any former names of directors of any particular company can be found on the company's file, which is open to public inspection at the office of the Registrar of Companies in London or Edinburgh, as the case may be.

Mr. RAMSBOTHAM: 27.
asked the President of the Board of Trade whether the Solicitor to the Board of Trade is taking any steps to detect or prevent evasion of Section 128 (1) (c) of the Companies, 1929, or whether he proposes to allow this Section to become inoperative until there is an Amendment passed to remedy the unforeseen flaw or loophole in the Act of 1929?

Mr. GRAHAM: I shall be happy to consider any evidence brought to my notice of evasion of this Section in specific cases. I have no reason to think that the Section is inoperative.

Sir HERBERT NIELD: 22.
asked the President of the Board of Trade whether, in view of the fact that 2,600 companies are at present in default in filing their balance sheets, he will, in future, publish in the Board of Trade Journal once every month the total of such defaulters, so that the results of the action of the solicitor to the Board of Trade may be seen?

Mr. GRAHAM: As was indicated by the Parliamentary Secretary on 18th February, the first steps in this matter are taken by the Registrar, and it is only necessary to refer oases to the Solicitor to the Board of Trade where the Registrar himself fails to secure the re-
turn. In these circumstances I doubt whether any useful purpose would be served at this stage by the preparation and publication of the figures asked for in the question, but I appreciate the point which the right hon. Gentleman has in mind, and I will consider later the desirability of taking action on the lines suggested by him.

Mr. DAY: Is the figure in the question correct?

Mr. GRAHAM: It is approximately correct.

Mr. KIRKWOOD: That means that 2,600 companies have defaulted. Does not that show the failure of private enterprise?

Oral Answers to Questions — COAL INDUSTRY.

ROYALTIES (NATIONALISATION).

Mr. MANDER: 20.
asked the President of the Board of Trade when it is intended to introduce legislation for the nationalisation of mining royalties?

Mr. W. GRAHAM: The Bill to deal with coal mining royalties will be introduced this Session, but in view of the pressure on Parliamentary time I cannot promise that it will be possible to make any further progress with the Bill before the end of July.

Mr. MANDER: Is it intended to pass it into law next Session?

Mr. GRAHAM: The intention is to pass it into law at the earliest possible moment, but the House will appreciate the congestion of business.

Captain Sir WILLIAM BRASS: Does the right hon. Gentleman think that the passing of the Measure will increase employment?

Mr. GRAHAM: It does not bear directly on employment, but it has a very important bearing on the coal mining industry.

EXPORT TRADE.

Mr. ROWSON: 35.
asked the President of the Board of Trade the total quantity of coal exported by all coal-producing countries in the world in the years 1911,
1912 and 1913, and in the years 1927, 1928 and 1929, respectively; and what proportion of such export trade was done by Great Britain?

STATEMENT showing the Total Quantities of Coal exported from the principal coal-producing countries during the years 1911, 1912, 1913, 1927, 1928 and 1929, and the proportion of such trade done by the United Kingdom.


—
1911.
1912.
1913.
1927.
1928.
1929.



(1,000 tons.)


Total Exports from principal producing countries.
165,147
173,166
194,835
172,086
170,394
Particulars not yet available.


Exports from the united Kingdom as percentage total.
52.7
49.6
50.5
40.4
40.6

Exports of coke and patent fuel, converted in terms of coal, are included in the above figures.

The above figures are substantially complete, but do not necessarily include the whole of the coal exported from all producing countries, and, on the other hand, some re-exports of imported coal may be included.

Owing to territorial changes resulting from the War, the pre-War and post War figures are not directly comparable.

Exports from the United Kingdom in 1927 and 1928 exclude those to the Irish Free State, as such trade in the years 1911–1913 was not included in the external trade of the United Kingdom.

WATH MAIN COLLIERY (EXPLOSION).

Mr. G. H. HIRST: (by Private Notice) asked the Secretary for Mines whether he has any statement to make regarding the explosion at the Wath Main Colliery?

The SECRETARY for MINES (Mr. Ben Turner): I deeply regret to inform the House that an explosion occurred in this mine on Monday night, as a result of which three men were killed, four burnt very seriously, and three burnt less seriously. An initial explosion, which apparently occurred immediately after a fall of roof, was followed by a second and more violent explosion which caught the men as they were making to come out of the workings. The divisional inspector of mines and his assistants have already made investigations in the pit, and further investigations are in progress at this moment. The House will join with

Mr. W. GRAHAM: With my hon. Friend's permission, I will circulate the information he asks for in the OFFICIAL REPORT

Following is the information:

me in expressing our deep sympathy with the families and friends of the dead and injured men and our earnest hope that all the injured may recover.

Mr. T. WILLIAMS: Will my hon. Friend ascertain whether there were in use at this particular colliery any automatic gas detectors?

Mr. TURNER: That is a question which I could not answer without making inquiries.

Mr. WILLIAMS: Is my right hon. Friend not aware that there is a large body of opinion in this country, particularly in the mining community, which no longer believes in a coroner's verdict of "Accidental death" in such cases as this?

Mr. TURNER: There is a great body of opinion in favour of gas detectors, but in this particular case a fall of roof broke the lamp, and it would, therefore, have broken even a gas detector. That was the position of affairs, as far as I am aware at the present time.

Mr. WILLIAMS: I personally happen to have worked in that particular district, and is my hon. Friend not aware that an automatic gas detector is absolutely necessary, if the lives and the limbs of men are going to be made safe?

Mr. TURNER: I agree completely with my hon. Friend that a proper, safe gas detector is a desirable thing. The matter is being explored very fully, and I trust there may be good results from it.

Mr. HARDIE: Is my hon. Friend not aware that the law relating to mines is this, that safety lamps are not given to men to allow them to work among gas, that the Act provides that there should be no gas where men are employed, and that these lamps are only given to men for safety in the case of a sudden inrush of gas? Will he ask the inspector to find out why that gas was present?

Mr. TURNER: I must have notice of these questions, which are very technical questions.

Mr. POTTS: Will my hon. Friend make a thorough investigation into the cause of this explosion, and report the same to the House?

Mr. TURNER: A most thorough investigation is taking place now, and a further one, when the time is opportune, will take place also.

Oral Answers to Questions — TRADE AND COMMERCE.

TARIFF TRUCE.

Sir K. WOOD: 23.
asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he can make a statement as to the progress and proceedings of the Tariff Truce Congress?

Mr. W. GRAHAM: The Tariff Conference met on 17th February, and the first week was occupied by a series of plenary meetings at which the delegates of the participating countries outlined their views. Two Committees have now been appointed, one to deal with the draft Convention for a tariff truce, and the other to draw up a programme of negotiations for collective agreements. These Committees are pursuing their tasks and are expected to report in the course of about a fortnight to the main conference.

Sir K. WOOD: Does the right hon. Gentleman anticipate that anything more will happen than the appointment of committees?

Mr. GRAHAM: I expect very excellent results.

Mr. HANNON: Will the findings of these committees be submitted to the House before the Government arrives at any definite policy?

Mr. GRAHAM: Not the findings of the two committees, which are committees of
the conference at Geneva, but, if anything is proposed in final form, it will certainly come before the House, and I believe hon. Members opposite have given notice for a debate in the near future.

Sir K. WOOD: Will not the right hon. Gentleman be very happy if there are any findings at all?

Mr. GRAHAM: There will be findings.

Sir WILLIAM DAVISON: Whatever the result, is the right hon. Gentleman aware that meanwhile, during the truce, this country will be very gravely prejudiced?

FREIGHTS (BELFAST AND LIVERPOOL).

Mr. ALLEN: 16.
asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he is aware of the effect on trade and employment in Belfast of the cost of freights between Belfast and Liverpool and other United Kingdom ports; and whether he will consider setting up a Committee to investigate the matter?

Mr. W. GRAHAM: I am not aware that any complaints have been made regarding freight rates between Belfast and Liverpool and other United Kingdom ports, but if the hon. Member has knowledge of such complaints and will supply me with details, I will consider the matter.

Mr. MacLAREN: Will the right hon. Gentleman consider asking the Belfast Government to allocate some of the £8,000,000 they are getting from this House for the purpose?

LACE TRADE.

Mr. RAMSBOTHAM: 26.
asked the President of the Board of Trade whether there are any statistics available to show how the turnover of fancy lace finishers for 1929 compares with that of 1924–25?

Mr. W. GRAHAM: The latest information available regarding the sales of lace was furnished on 5th November last in reply to a question by the hon. and gallant Member for Bournemouth (Sir H. Croft), of which I am sending the hon. Member a copy. No separate particulars are available regarding fancy lace.

Mr. HANNON: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware of the uncertainty now prevailing at Nottingham? Does he really contemplate these duties coming to an end next July?

Captain HUDSON: 34.
asked the President of the Board of Trade the rack-output of lace in Nottingham for each quarter in the years 1925 and 1929, respectively?

Mr. GRAHAM: As has been explained in answer to previous questions, the Board of Trade are not in possession of complete figures of production covering all firma in the lace trade. Information covering a portion of the trade is supplied periodically to the Department through trade channels, but some of the particulars relating to 1929 have not yet been received. When these are available, I will communicate what information I can to the hon. Member.

COTTON EXPORTS (INDIA).

Sir N. GRATTAN-DOYLE: 28.
asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he has received any representations respecting the injury to Lancashire cotton goods arising out of any increase in the import duty by the Indian Government; and, if so, whether he proposes to take any action?

Mr. W. GRAHAM: Since the Government of India instituted last July an inquiry into the import duties on cotton piece goods, I have maintained close touch with representatives of the cotton industry and have taken steps to let their views on the matter be known in the proper quarter.

Sir W. BRASS: Can the right hon. Gentleman tell us whether the Government have any power over the imposition of these duties in India?

Mr. GRAHAM: I would remind the hon. and gallant Member of the Fiscal Autonomy Convention which is really the reply to his question.

Dr. VERNON DAVIES: Can the right hon. Gentleman inform the House what representations have been made?

Mr. GRAHAM: I must not enlarge on the question, but I can assure the hon. Member that the fullest representations that can properly be made have been made.

TEXTILE INDUSTRY (FOREIGN COMPETITION).

Mr. ALLEN: 17.
asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he can state the amount of linen goods exported from Czechoslovakia into the United Kingdom during the last 12 months;
whether he is aware that the wages paid in the Czechoslovakian linen industry are approximately 40 per cent. of the wages paid for the same categories of work in this country; and whether he proposes to take steps to safeguard the employment of British workers in this industry from the competition resulting from the low standard of wages maintained by Czechoslovakian manufacturers?

Mr. W. GRAHAM: The imports of flax yarns registered as consigned from Czechoslovakia in 1929 were 412 tons, valued at £88,616, and of linen manufactures £19,280, as compared with a British output which, according to the last Census of Production, amounted in 1924 to 43,000 tons of yarns, and piece goods valued at 14 millions sterling. The figures of imports do not include articles of apparel, particulars for which are not separately recorded. As regards the second part of the question, the available information as to wages in the linen industry in Czechoslovakia is insufficient for the purpose of exact comparisons, but I am aware that wages generally in Czechoslovakia are substantially lower than in this country. As regards the third part of the question, I have nothing to add to previous statements as to the policy of the Government.

Mr. DOUGLAS HACKING: 18.
asked the President of the Board of Trade what methods he is adopting to ensure that no yarn nor manufactured cotton-piece goods enter this country from Russia without his knowledge?

Mr. GRAHAM: I have no reason to doubt that goods consigned to this country from Russia are so returned to the Customs authorities but, as has already been indicated, any individual cases of a different practice, of which the right hon. Gentleman may furnish particulars, will be fully investigated.

Mr. THURTLE: Is the right hon. Gentleman keeping his eye on the yams that come from Riga?

Mr. SMITHERS: 21.
asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he can give the House the amount of yarn and cotton goods imported into this country from Japan for the last three years for which statistics are available and especially for the past few months?

Mr. GRAHAM: On 13th February, in reply to a question by the hon. Member
for Stockport (Mr. Hammersley, I cerculated in the OFFICIAL REPORT a table showing the value of cotton merchandise of various descriptions imported during the past three years and registered as consigned from Japan. I am sending the hon. Member a copy of this table and will circulate in the OFFICIAL REPORT a corresponding table for the four months October to January last.

The following TABLE shows the TOTAL DECLARED VALUE of the undermentioned descriptions of Cotton Merchandise imported into Great Britain and Northern Ireland during each of the months October, 1929, to January, 1930, inclusive, and registered as consigned from Japan (including Formosa and Japanese leased territories in China).


Description.
Oct., 1929.
Nov., 1929.
Dec, 1929.
Total Oct.-Dec, 1929.
Jan., 1930.



£
£
£
£
£


Cotton, raw
—
—
—
—
1,040


Cotton linters
—
—
—
—
—


Cotton waste, unmanufactured
7,812
8,692
6,150
22,654
4,850


Cotton yarns
—
—
—
—
—


Cotton manufactures (except apparel and embroidery):—







Piece goods: Grey, unbleached
—
—
—
—
—


White, bleached
—
—
108
108
—


Printed
731
1,693
1,866
4,290
6,079


Dyed in the piece
3,106
1,571
14,936
19,613
4,814


Manufactured wholly or in part of dyed yarn, and commonly known as coloured cottons.
1,310
610
536
2,456
1,965


Flags, handkerchiefs and shawls, wholly of cotton, not in the piece.
—
—
82
82
—


Lace and net
9
—
—
9
4


Finished thread
—
—
—
—
—


Small wares, including ribbons and trimmings.
61
—
5
66
52


Made up cotton goods for household purposes.
11,837
8,610
7,633
28,080
11,336


Manufactured cotton cleaning waste
20
—
—
20
—


Cotton manufactures, not elsewhere specified
1,537
1,149
1,559
4,245
884


Apparel:—







Fabric gloves, wholly or in part of cotton
—
—
—
—
—


Hosiery of cotton, or of which the chief value is cotton:—







Stockings and hose
7,474
13,357
14,567
35,398
23,997


Underwear
25,110
27,390
20,509
73,009
31,009


Fancy hosiery
1,715
1,625
1,268
4,608
2,900


Total of above
60,722
64,697
69,219
194,638
88,930


Notes.—In addition to the above items, other articles of apparel imported from Japan are probably made of cotton, but such articles are not classified in the Import Returns according to the material of which they are made, and therefore are not included in the above table.


The above figures are provisional.

Mr. ALLEN: 29.
asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he can state the value and amount of Russian linen yarn dumped in Northern Ireland during the last year; whether he is aware of the unemployment in the spinning end

Mr. SMITHERS: May we assume that the figures are increasing, and, if so, does not the right hon. Gentleman think it will be a good thing to put on a protective duty against those goods to help our workers in the cotton industry?

Mr. SPEAKER: That is too big a question to go into at Question Time.

Following is the table:

of the linen industry in Northern Ireland; and whether he has any information as to the hours and wages operating in this branch of production in Russia, by comparison with those operating in Northern Ireland?

Mr. GRAHAM: During the year 1929, the quantity of flax yam imported into Northern Ireland and registered as consigned from the Soviet Union (Russia) was 5,191 cwts., valued at £39,537. I have no information regarding the amount of unemployment in the various sections of the linen industry, for which as a whole the percentage unemployed in January last was 14.6. In September, 1929, according to official figures published by the Soviet the average hourly rate of all workers in the linen industry in Russia was 26.6 copecs (6.7 pence), and the spinners worked an average of 7½ hours a day. In Northern Ireland, female spinners earned 6d. an hour at a corresponding date, the normal working week being 48 hours.

Mr. ALLEN: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the value of the copec is maintained on an artificial basis, and that it is worth about half its official value?

AGRICULTURAL MACHINERY (RUSSIA).

Sir W. DAVISON: 36.
asked the President of the Board of Trade what is the total value of the exports to Soviet Russia of agricultural machinery made in the United Kingdom for the period 30th November, 1929, to 31st January, 1930?

Mr. W. GRAHAM: The total declared value of the exports of agricultural machinery and parts thereof manufactured in Great Britain and Northern Ireland and registered as consigned to the Soviet Union (Russia) during the months of December, 1929, and January, 1930, amounted to £847.

COTTON INDUSTRY (INQUIRY).

Sir W. BRASS: 47.
asked the Prime Minister whether he can inform the House at what date he expects to receive the report of the Commission set up to inquire into the conditions of the cotton trade?

The PRIME MINISTER: In view of the exceptionally heavy Parliamentary duties of my right hon. Friend, the President of the Board of Trade, I have invited my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary to act as Chairman for the remainder of this inquiry. I understand that it is being pressed forward with all possible expedition.

Sir W. BRASS: Is the Prime Minister aware that not only the President of the Board of Trade but the First Lord of the Admiralty has been Chairman of this Committee, and does he expect the Committee to have a satisfactory report when no one single chairman has heard all the evidence?

The PRIME MINISTER: I admit the difficulty, but at the same time I can assure the House that other methods have been taken so as to keep this inquiry going, and outside the inquiry efforts are being made to deal with the position.

Dr. DAVIES: Will the right hon. Gentleman bear in mind that it is not necessary to keep the inquiry going but that it is necessary to have some practical results because the condition of Lancashire is so serious.

Oral Answers to Questions — CONSUMERS' COUNCIL.

Sir GEORGE HAMILTON: 30.
asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he has yet set up a consumers' council, as promised at the beginning of this Parliament; and, if so, can he state the names of the council?

Mr. W. GRAHAM: As I indicated on the 5th November last, it is proposed to introduce legislation in due course setting up a consumers' council.

Oral Answers to Questions — MERCANTILE MARINE.

BRITISH SEAMEN (FOREIGN IMPRISONMENT).

Mr. HORE-BELISHA: 31.
asked the President of the Board of Trade how many British seamen were left behind in foreign ports under sentence of imprisonment for offences against the law of the country in which they were sentenced during the years 1927, 1928, and 1929; and what arrangements are made for the repatriation of such seamen at the expiration of their sentences?

Mr. W. GRAHAM: It is not practicable to give the information sought in the first part of the question without a long and expensive investigation. Arrangements are made by the British Consul at the foreign port for the repatriation of such seamen at the end of
the term of imprisonment, and for maintenance prior to repatriation if that cannot be immediately provided.

Mr. HORE-BELISHA: 33.
asked the President of the Board of Trade how many British seamen were tried in the years 1927, 1928, and 1929 in foreign Courts on charges of offences against the Merchant Shipping Acts; how many were acquitted; how many were fined; and how many received sentences of imprisonment which were afterwards served in foreign prisons?

Mr. GRAHAM: I have no record of any cases of the kind described in the question.

BOARD OF TRADE EXAMINATIONS (CHINESE NATIONALS).

Mr. HORE-BELISHA: 32.
asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he will explain the issue of Notice 601 in the Hong Kong Government Gazette of the 22nd November, 1929, stating that Chinese nationals will be permitted to sit at the Board of Trade examinations for master, first mate, and chief engineer under the same conditions as laid down for British subjects; and whether this means that the Board of Trade Regulations which confine examinations for certificates of competency under the Merchant Shipping Act to British subjects have now been widened?

Mr. W. GRAHAM: The arrangement made by Order No. 601 in the Hong Kong Government Gazette of the 22nd November, 1929, was approved at the instance of the Colonial authorities in Hong Kong. As to the effect of the arrangement, I would refer my hon. Friend to the reply given by the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies on the 19th February to the hon. Member for Moseley (Mr. Hannon).

Mr. HORE-BELISHA: Will the right hon. Gentleman be good enough to answer the last part of the question, as to whether this means that the Board of Trade Regulations, which confine examinations for certificates of competency to British subjects, have been widened?

Mr. GRAHAM: No, Sir, I gather that in this case they do not receive a certificate of competency, which is restricted to British subjects, but that they receive in its place a letter signed by the examiner
certifying that the examination has been passed. That is really the essence of the change.

Mr. HORE-BELISHA: Does that apply only to Chinese and not to any other nationals?

Mr. GRAHAM: I prefer that that question should be put on the Paper.

Lieut.-Commander KENWORTHY: Does this letter entitle them to serve as officers on British ships; and is it given in place of the Board of Trade certificate?

Mr. GRAHAM: I should not like to reply finally to that question without notice, but I understand that that is not the case.

Mr. WARDLAW-MILNE: Can the right hon. Gentleman state whether it is not a fact that British subjects born in India, for example, are perfectly entitled to sit for these examinations and receive certificates as any other British subject?

Mr. GRAHAM: That is quite new material. If the hon. Member will put down a question, I will gladly give him a reply.

Sir LAMING WORTHINGTON-EVANS: Can the right hon. Gentleman tell us what is the value of this letter if it does not enable the people who receive it to serve as mate and so on on British ships?

Mr. GRAHAM: It is largely, as I understand it, a question of providing examination facilities, and this letter from the chief examiner is not a certificate of competency which can only be granted to British subjects.

Sir L. WORTHINGTON-EVANS: What is the use of the letter? Has the letter any value or validity at all?

Mr. GRAHAM: Oh. yes, certainly. I should think that it would have value, at all events, as showing that these examinations have been taken, and up to a point they are evidence of a certain level of competency.

Sir L. WORTHINGTON-EVANS: Can the right hon. Gentleman say what is the use of the letter, which, having been given, does not appear to qualify the recipient for anything at all?

Mr. GRAHAM: It qualifies for service beyond question.

Sir L. WORTHINGTON-EVANS: For what?

Mr. GRAHAM: It must qualify for service in some capacity. I cannot this afternoon indicate to the right hon. Gentleman the precise way in which it can be used without notice of a question of that kind.

Oral Answers to Questions — FORESTRY WORKERS (WAGES).

Mr. FRANK OWEN: 37.
asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Board of Trade as representing the Forestry Commissioners, if the Forestry Commissioners intend to raise the wages of forestry workers above the minimum now paid to the workers privately employed by farmers?

The PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY to the BOARD of TRADE (Mr. W. R. Smith): The whole question of the wages and conditions of service of the Forestry Commission's workers is under consideration.

Mr. ERNEST BROWN: Will the Forestry Commissioners act as model employers?

Mr. SMITH: I am awaiting their decision. They have not finally examined the question.

Mr. BUCHANAN: Is the hon. Gentleman aware that in Scotland the Forestry Commissioners are paying shocking wages to the people in their employ?

Major OWEN: Is it proposed by the Forestry Commission that the men employed by them shall be regarded as being employed in an insured occupation?

Mr. SMITH: That matter is determined by Act of Parliament which is outside our jurisdiction.

Mr. F. OWEN: Is the hon. Gentleman aware that at the present moment forestry workers are paid, many of them, about 31s. per week, that they have to provide all their tools which amount to about 40s. or 50s., and that when they lose time in the woods it is not made up to them?

Mr. SPEAKER: Those seem to be matters for a separate question.

Oral Answers to Questions — BRITISH ARMY.

TATTOOS.

Mr. DAY: 38.
asked the Secretary of State for War whether he can give particulars of any military tattoos that have been sanctioned by his Department for the year 1930?

The SECRETARY of STATE for WAR (Mr. T. Shaw): The General Officers Commanding-in-Chief the Aldershot, Eastern, Northern and Southern Commands have authority, should they think fit, to permit a Command tattoo in 1930. I understand that in the Southern Command a tattoo will be held in August, and in the Aldershot Command in June, but that no definite derision has been reached in the other two Commands. Tattoos, other than the four mentioned above, may only be held with War Office authority, and up to the present, no such authority has been given for 1930.

MEAT AND WHEAT SUPPLIES.

Mr. HACKING: 39.
asked the Secretary of State for War whether, in view of the recent Government instruction to all Departments of State to buy British goods, it is his intention in future to purchase British meat and wheat for the Army?

Mr. SHAW: I would refer the right hon. Member to the reply given to him on 20th February by my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister, to which I have nothing to add.

Mr. ALBERY: Has the right hon. Gentleman's attention been drawn to the case of a hospital which obtains money by supplying British wheat?

Mr. SHAW: No. My attention has not been drawn to that. The hon. Member might do it for me.

ALBANY STREET BARRACKS.

Mr. CARTER: 41.
asked the Secretary of State for War whether the present position of the Albany Street barracks is suitable; and, if not, whether, considering the need for working-class housing in that district, he will entertain the suggestion of removing these barracks further from the centre of London?

Mr. MARLEY: 40.
asked the Secretary of State for War whether it would be possible to transfer all the troops now accommodated at Albany Street barracks to
other barracks within the London area and make this site available for house building and slum clearance?

Mr. SHAW: While the position of the Albany Street barracks is not ideal for the purposes for which they are required it has not been possible to find suitable alternative accommodation except at prohibitive cost.

MARCHING ORDER KIT (WEIGHT).

Colonel HOWARD-BURY: 42.
asked the Secretary of State for War whether he is aware that weights carried by the private soldier, when in full marching order, have been increased during the past few years; and whether he is taking any steps to reduce these weights?

Mr. SHAW: There has been no increase in the regulation weight carried by an infantry soldier during the last few years and there was a decrease of four pounds in 1924. The desirability of reducing the weight is fully recognised and the possibilities of doing so are under constant examination.

Mr. BEAUMONT: Can the right hon. Gentleman say when there was an increase? Was it in the last two years?

Mr. SHAW: In the War there was an increase.

Mr. BEAUMONT: Not since?

Mr. SHAW: A decrease since.

Oral Answers to Questions — SCOTLAND.

LOCAL GOVERNMENT.

Mr. WESTWOOD: 63.
asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will have a White Paper prepared giving the contents and boundaries of the electoral divisions of the respective counties, giving the number of county councillors for the respective counties, and the apportionment of these county councillors between the landward area and the burghs entitled to be represented on the county council, and the district committee areas with the number of members of the respective district committees?

The SECRETARY of STATE for SCOTLAND (Mr. William Adamson): The publication of a White Paper of the nature suggested by my hon. Friend
would involve a considerable expenditure, and I do not think that its usefulness would justify the cost. The information referred to will be found in the Orders made under Section 8 and the schemes approved under Section 25 of the Local Government (Scotland) Act, 1929, which have been or will be published in full in the Edinburgh Gazette.

HOUSING.

Mr. BUCHANAN: 43.
asked the Secretary of State for Scotland the number of persons in Glasgow who have been removed to slum clearance houses from slum areas and how many have been unable to remain in the houses owing to inability to pay rent; and if he can state how many actions have been taken at the courts for arrears of rent?

The UNDER-SECRETARY of STATE for SCOTLAND (Mr. Johnston): A total of 3,963 families representing approximately 17,710 persons have been removed to houses provided under slum clearance schemes in Glasgow. The number of families who have left the houses owing to inability to pay rents is 281 of whom 165 left voluntarily and 116 were evicted. As regards the second part of the question, 615 actions have been taken in the courts for recovery of arrears of rent.

Mr. BUCHANAN: In view of the fact that these figures represent a fair number of persons who are unable to pay the rent, will the Under-Secretary make representations to the Glasgow Corporation to get a revision of the rents, which are fairly high?

Mr. JOHNSTON: That raises a big question of poverty and its relief, and it could not be adequately discussed by way of Question and Answer.

Mr. BUCHANAN: Cannot something be done with the Corporation of Glasgow with regard to a revision of rents, as has been done elsewhere?

Mr. ALBERY: Can the Under-Secretary say what period is covered by the figures?

Mr. JOHNSTON: The period of slum clearance.

Mr. WESTWOOD: 44.
asked the Secretary of State for Scotland the number of houses that have been built by the Mid-
lothian County Council under the respective Housing Acts and the districts in which they have been built; and if he is aware that a demand exists in the Roslin area of the Lasswade district which the county council are failing to meet?

Mr. JOHNSTON: As the answer to the question is somewhat long and involves

County of Midlothian.
Number of Houses built under the—
Total.


Housing. Town Planning, etc. (Scotland) Act. 1919.
Housing, etc., Act, 1923.
Housing (Financial Provisions) Act, 1924.


Calder District
…
56
166
—
222


Lasswade District
…
20 (Roslin Site)
—
—
20


Gala Water District
…
—
—
52
52


Total
…
76
166
52
294

As regards the latter part of the question, I am informed that last July the housing requirements in the Roslin area were estimated at 48 houses, but since then 32 houses have been built and eight are on point of completion—all by private enterprise assisted by the local authority. The erection of eight additional houses by private enterprise is at present under consideration.

RED BIDDY.

Mr. McELWEE: 64.
asked the Secretary of State for Scotland whether he is now in a position to report to the House the result of his promised examination into the injurious effects of the alcoholic beverage known as red biddy; and whether he has any evidence to show that this intoxicant is produced in any substantial degree in Leith?

Mr. W. ADAMSON: The inquiries which I have so far made indicate that there is a considerable sale of cheap red wines in Scotland and that the term "red biddy" is sometimes applied to such cheap red wine, and sometimes to a mixture of the wine and methylated or other spirits. There is no evidence of the manufacture or sale in Scotland of beverages containing such mixtures, but there is reason to believe that these mixtures are made by some purchasers of cheap red wine. The effects of such mixtures are

a tabular statement, I propose, with my hon. Friend's permission, to circulate it in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Following is the answer:

The number of houses built by the county council of Midlothian under the several Housing Acts and the districts in which they have been built are shown in the following table:

most harmful. I am informed that a considerable quatity of red wine is manufactured in Leith. I am awaiting medical reports on the subject.

Mr. SULLIVAN: Is it not a fact that this cheap red wine is British-made wine?

Mr. E. BROWN: Is the right hon. Gentleman not aware that Leith is famous for its rejection of inferior red articles?

Viscountess ASTOR: Will the right hon. Gentleman bear in mind that his party is pledged to deal with the drink question; and will he tell the House what steps he is going to take to stop the sale of this article which is doing real harm to these fine Scotsmen?

Mr. ADAMSON: I have already in formed the House of the steps which I am prepared to take.

Sir N. GRATTAN-DOYLE: Can the right hon. Gentleman tell the House what are the ingredients of red biddy?

Mr. E. BROWN: Read the "New Leader."

Captain CAZALET: Can we have samples in the tea room?

JUVENILE OFFENDERS (TREATMENT).

Sir FREDERICK THOMSON: 66.
asked the Secretary of State for Scotland
whether he is now in a position to take action to deal with the recommendations of the Departmental Committee on the Treatment of Young Offenders in Scotland?

Mr. W. ADAMSON: As regards recommendations which can be carried into effect administratively, the hon. Member is aware that Circulars have been issued by the Scottish Office and the Scottish Education Department. I have had under review other matters connected with the existing arrangements for the after-care of young offenders, and I hope shortly to be in a position to institute various administrative improvements. As regards recommendations involving legislation, I hope in due course to introduce legislation amending the Children Act, 1908, and dealing with probation and other matters. A Probation Bill for Scotland has been drafted, but the date of its introduction must depend upon the state of Parliamentary business.

Sir F. THOMSON: Does the right hon. Gentleman remember that he gave me precisely the same answer last July?

Viscountess ASTOR: Will the right hon. Gentleman tell us exactly what he means by "in due course," as it is very important that these recommendations should be carried out as soon as possible?

Mr. ADAMSON: I am unaware, at the moment, of what question was put to me by the hon. Member in July, but, in my answer, I have gone very carefully into the position, and told the hon. Member exactly what I am prepared to do.

Oral Answers to Questions — ECONOMIC ADVISORY COUNCIL.

Mr. MANDER: 46.
asked the Prime Minister whether it is the intention of the Government that the new Economic Advisory Council shall, as its first and most urgent task, deal with the problem of the prevention of unemployment?

The PRIME MINISTER: I would refer the hon. Member to the reply which I gave last Thursday to a similar question by "the hon. and gallant Member for Gainsborough (Captain Crookshank), of which I am sending him a copy.

Mr. MANDER: Does the Prime Minister not feel that the question of unem-
ployment is by far the most important question before the country at the present time?

The PRIME MINISTER: The hon. Member might assume that from the reply that I have given.

Oral Answers to Questions — AUSTRIA (LOAN).

Mr. HANNON: 48.
asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether there are now no political difficulties in the way of the issue of the new Austrian loan; if he can state when he contemplates the loan shall be placed upon the money market; and if, as the recent economic progress of Austria has been satisfactory, with a profit balance in its national balance sheet during recent years, he will do everything possible to facilitate industrial and agricultural development in Austria through the League of Nations?

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER (Mr. Philip Snowden): So far as I am aware, there are now no political difficulties in the way of the issue of the proposed new Austrian loan; the question when the issue should take place is one for the decision of the Austrian Government in consultation with the financial institutions concerned. I cannot make a statement on that matter or on the matter referred to in the last part of the question.

Mr. HANNON: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware of the substantial economic progress made by this small country during the last few years, and will he use his influence at the League of Nations to facilitate this loan as far as he possibly can?

Mr. SNOWDEN: I am well aware of the economic progress of Austria during the last few years, and I am glad of it, but this is a matter of the internal policy of Austria, and I cannot interfere.

Oral Answers to Questions — GOVERNMENT PROPERTY (SALE).

Sir G. HAMILTON: 49.
asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he can state approximately the considerations which led him to set up a Committee to inquire into the possibility of the sale of Government lands and property?

Mr. P. SNOWDEN: The Committee referred to was appointed because the Government considered it desirable that the present allocation of Government properties should be examined with a view to liberating any available properties for full economic development.

Sir AUSTEN CHAMBERLAIN: Is this the first step in the process of nationalisation?

Mr. SNOWDEN: That will depend, I suppose, upon the result of the Committee's Report.

Sir G. HAMILTON: Is this the first step towards the nationalisation of land?

Mr. STEPHEN: Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether any members of the Labour party have been appointed on the Committee?

Mr. SNOWDEN: In appointing these Committees, I try to find men who possess knowledge of the subject to be considered. I do not inquire into their politics, but I have sometimes discovered afterwards that members of the Committee do belong to the Labour party and that they have the essential knowledge and qualifications.

Sir JOHN FERGUSON: May I ask the right hon. Gentleman if any of the members he has appointed are members of the Surveyors' and Valuers' Institution?

Mr. STEPHEN: Is the right hon. Gentleman of opinion that it is only gentlemen on the other side who have specialised knowledge and qualifications?

Oral Answers to Questions — SAFEGUARDING AND IMPORT DUTIES.

MANCHESTER CHAMBER OF COMMERCE.

Mr. HACKING: 50.
asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he is aware of the fact that the meeting held in King Street, Manchester, on 13th January, which requested him to continue the existing Excise and Import Duties, was the monthly meeting of the directors of the Manchester Chamber of Commerce, and was attended by 23 prominent business men of Lancashire; and whether, in view of the importance and representative character of this meeting and in the interest of employment in
Lancashire, he will make an immediate pronouncement to the effect that these duties will be retained?

Mr. P. SNOWDEN: I am unable to add to my previous statements on this subject.

Mr. HACKING: Is it the right hon. Gentleman's view that his is the only opinion of any value?

Mr. SNOWDEN: No. In this matter, the opinion that I expressed is shared by the president and executive of the Manchester Chamber of Commerce, who have expressed their gratitude to me for the statement that I made last December. In that statement, they say that I have gone out of my way to meet them, and have gone as far as it is possible for me to go. May I, while answering that question, express my gratitude to the right hon. Member for calling my attention to the fact that the resolution to which he refers in his question received only 14 votes out of 23 members present?

Mr. HACKING: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that that is a majority vote, and, further, is he aware that the President of the Manchester Chamber of Commerce has condemned in no uncertain voice the policy of the Chancellor of the Exchequer?

Mr. SNOWDEN: The president of the Manchester Chamber of Commerce wrote to me on the 24th December, and, instead of condemning my action, he said:
The Chamber recognises that precedent makes it impossible for you to declare in advance whether the Budget would propose any such disturbance. Short of this, we consider that you have gone out of your way to make a statement designed to mitigate as far as possible the detrimental effects of the uncertainty which exists, and we would add that we welcome your statement, which will enable trade to continue operations to a far greater extent than would be possible in the absence of any such statement. It is recognised that the departure from precedent much have caused you considerable anxiety, and the Chamber is grateful to you.

Mr. HACKING: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that that letter is completely out of date and that the Chamber of Commerce has altered its opinion since?

Mr. SNOWDEN: It appears that 14 persons out of 23 have expressed a somewhat different view, but I am prepared
to abide by the statement of the president of the Chamber of Commerce in this letter.

SILK INDUSTRY.

Mr. REMER: 52.
asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he has received representations as to the Silk Duties from the Silk Association of Great Britain and Ireland; and if he will state the nature of these representations and what reply he has made to this association representing the whole silk trade?

Mr. P. SNOWDEN: I have received a resolution from the Silk Association urging that the Silk Duties should not be removed. The communication has been acknowledged.

Mr. REMER: Is the right hon. Gentlemen aware that the Prime Minister last week stated that the right hon. Gentleman had taken into consultation all the organisations interested; and may I ask whether he has taken into consultation the Silk Association of Great Britain?

Mr. SNOWDEN: I have not taken the Silk Association into consultation. Their views are well known.

Lieut.-Colonel HENEAGE: Does the right hon. Gentleman consider that the only point of view to be considered is that of the President of the Manchester Chamber of Commerce?

Oral Answers to Questions — INCOME TAX.

Mr. MORT: 51.
asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he will take steps to expedite the repayment of claims for refund of tax in the Euston No. 1 district and also reform the system so as to obviate the collection of tax from exempted bodies, presumably involving commission for collection and further cost involved in the repayment?

Mr. P. SNOWDEN: If my hon. Friend will give me particulars of any case in which there has been undue delay in refunding tax under a repayment claim, I will cause inquiry to be made and communicate the result to him in due course.

Major NATHAN: 53.
asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer the approximate gross annual value of lands and other property assessed to Income Tax under
Schedule A for the year 1928–29, and the yield of Income Tax thereon for the same year?

Mr. SNOWDEN: The gross income assessed under Schedule A for the year 1928–29 is estimated at £415,000,000. The total yield of Income Tax cannot be divided by Schedules, and I am unable therefore to give the yield of tax corresponding to this assessment.

Sir N. GRATTAN-DOYLE: 60.
asked the Financial Secretary to the Treasury whether inspectors of taxes are acting under instructions in applying to local councils for certified copies of the valuation lists under the Rating and Valuation Act; and, if so, whether he can state for what purpose these applications are being made and to what use it is intended to put the information so obtained?

The FINANCIAL SECRETARY to the TREASURY (Mr. Pethick-Lawrence): It is a regular and long-established practice for inspectors of taxes to obtain fram rating authorities extracts from the ratebooks or valuation lists, and no special instructions have been issued in this connection. The information is essential for the purpose of ensuring that all new and altered properties are duly brought into charge for Income Tax.

Mr. WARDLAW-MILNE: May I ask whether the attention of the Financial Secretary has been drawn to the statement that the information thus obtained is being used in connection with Schedule A assessments?

Mr. PETHICK-LAWRENCE: That is the object of the information. It is to enable us to avail ourselves of such information in regard to new property.

Mr. WARDLAW-MILNE: Does not my hon. Friend know that it is not always a case of new property?

Sir N. GRATTAN-DOYLE: Is the Financial Secretary satisfied that this is a fair, honest, and legitimate way of getting information?

Mr. PETHICK-LAWRENCE: Certainly. It is the practice which has been in vogue for a long time. In regard to the question put to me by the hon. Member for Kidderminster (Mr. Wardlaw-Milne), if there is any point with which I have not dealt, perhaps he will put it down in another question.

Oral Answers to Questions — IMPERIAL AND INTERNATIONAL COMMUNICATIONS, LIMITED.

Mr. WELLOCK: 54.
asked the Financial Secretary to the Treasury whether the two directors of Imperial and International Communications, Limited, who are approved by the Government, have yet submitted a report to the Government; and, if not, whether it is part of their duty periodically to submit a report?

Mr. PETHICK-LAWRENCE: It is no part of the duty of the two directors of the company approved by the Government to submit periodical reports and none have been received.

Mr. WELLOCK: May I ask what advantage is supposed to accrue from the appointment of these two directors?

Mr. MALONE: Are we to assume that these two directors have disregarded the Government and are now engaged in a Press campaign against the Cabinet?

Mr. MALONE: 61.
asked the Financial Secretary to the Treasury whether His Majesty's Government will instruct the representative of His Majesty's Government on the Imperial Communications Advisory Committee to institute an inquiry into the charges for communications by Imperial and International Communications Company throughout the Empire?

Mr. PETHICK-LAWRENCE: One of the primary duties of this Committee is to consider charges for communication. I am informed that the Committee already have under consideration the question of charges between different parts of the Empire. In the circumstances I see no reason for instructing the representatives of His Majesty's Government in the United Kingdom in the sense indicated.

Oral Answers to Questions — BRITISH MUSEUM AND PUBLIC GALLERIES.

Captain CAZALET: 55.
asked the Financial Secretary to the Treasury what replies have been received from the trustees of the National and Tate Galleries and the British Museum with regard to the early introduction of legislation to permit them to make loans to special exhibitions or other galleries?

Mr. PETHICK-LAWRENCE: The Trustees of the National Gallery and the Tate Gallery are in favour of legislation
for enabling them to lend pictures abroad, subject to certain limitations and conditions, and for abolishing, subject to the consent of the donor or his representatives, the restriction that pictures given or bequeathed may not be lent before the expiration of 15 years. The Trustees of the British Museum have appointed a Sub-Committee on the subject, and no report has yet been received.

Captain CAZALET: May I ask whether the Trustees were unanimous in this matter?

Mr. PETHICK-LAWRENCE: I should want notice of that question.

Mr. ORMSBY-GORE: Is it the intention of the Government be introduce legislation when they have received a reply from the Trustees of the British Museum?

Mr. PETHICK-LAWRENCE: I have no doubt the matter will be considered when this further decision has to be taken.

Captain CAZALET: 56.
asked the Financial Secretary to the Treasury whether it is proposed to carry out the recommendations of the recent Royal Commission on Public Galleries and Museums in regard to the evening openings and artificial lighting of the National Gallery, the Tate Gallery, and the British Museum; and whether he has asked the opinion of the several boards of trustees regarding the introduction of electric light and longer hours of opening?

Major NATHAN: 62.
asked the Financial Secretary to the Treasury whether he proposes to institute a system of electric or other artificial lighting in the National Gallery and other galleries and museums at present without artificial light?

Mr. PETHICK-LAWRENCE: Provision is being made for the artificial lighting of the National Gallery and the Tate Gallery. Before deciding on opening the British Museum in the evening it is proposed to watch the results of the experimental evening openings which have been authorised at the Victoria and Albert and Bethnal Green Museums. The several Boards of Trustees have been consulted.

Mr. ORMSBY-GORE: Will this Estimate for new lighting be presented with the Estimates for the year?

Mr. MILLS: Will the Financial Secretary take into consideration the fact that the British Museum is often used by students and is, therefore, in an entirely different category from the Bethnal Green Museum, and the Victoria and Albert Museum. The facilities of the British Museum are used more than those of the other two.

Mr. PETHICK-LAWRENCE: The whole matter will be considered after the other cases have been watched, but it does not follow that the one case will determine the other. With regard to the point put by the right hon. Member for Stafford (Mr. Ormsby-Gore), I will look into it.

Oral Answers to Questions — MEDICINE STAMP DUTY.

Mr. LONGBOTTOM: 57.
asked the Financial Secretary to the Treasury if he is aware that bottles of phosferine are being sold by grocers at 1s. 3d. each, upon which a revenue stamp of 3d. has been affixed, and that similar bottles are being retailed by chemists at 1s. 3d. each without revenue stamp; and, if so, what is the explanation?

Mr. PETHICK-LAWRENCE: The prices of medicines are not subject to official control. As regards the Revenue stamp, the law exempts medicines from Medicine Stamp Duty under certain conditions, when they are sold by qualified chemists but not by grocers.

Sir G. HAMILTON: Can the hon. Member say what the Co-operative Society charges for these things?

Mr. LONGBOTTOM: Is the Parliamentary Secretary aware that this is the first of a series of evasions of the Stamp Duty for patent medicines, and, in view of the fact that manufacturers of patent medicines are taking the amount of money hitherto paid in Stamp Duty, will he not consider the advisability of introducing legislation to stop this wholesale profiteering at the expense of the national revenue?

Mr. PETHICK-LAWRENCE: This matter arises out of ancient legislation, and if there is proof that any loophole exists I have no doubt the matter will be considered.

Mr. LONGBOTTOM: Does not my hon. Friend know that the wholesale price of phosferine is 13s. per dozen, and that the Stamp Duty on this should be 6d. instead of 3d,?

Sir G. HAMILTON: Can the Parliamentary Secretary answer my question; whether he knows what the Co-operative Society is charging for these things?

Mr. PETHICK-LAWRENCE: I have no information on that matter.

Oral Answers to Questions — GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS (ARCHITECTS).

Sir N. GRATTAN-DOYLE: 59.
asked the Financial Secretary to the Treasury what Departments of the Government have architects on their staffs; and whether any scheme is under consideration for the amalgamation of these staffs under the Office of Works?

Mr. PETHICK-LAWRENCE: The Office of Works, Office of Commissioners of Crown Lands, the Post Office and the Service Departments employ architects in an executive capacity. In addition architects are employed as advisers in connection with certain other Ministries, a list of which I will circulate in the OFFICIAL REPORT. As regards the last part of the question no scheme for amalgamating these staffs is under consideration.

Sir W. DAVISON: May I ask what my hon. Friend means by "employing architects in an executive capacity." Does he mean that they are civil servants?

Mr. PETHICK-LAWRENCE: I could not say what is the precise distinction, but in one case they are doing the work and in the other they are advising on the work.

Following is the list:

Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries.
Board of Control.
Board of Education.
Ministry of Health.
Department of Health for Scotland.
Ministry of Pensions.
State Management Districts.

QUESTIONS TO MINISTERS.

Major OWEN: On a point of Order with regard to the Questions on the Paper. A week ago I put a question
dealing with unemployment to the Lord Privy Seal. I had a communication some days later from the Lord Privy Seal informing me that the question had been passed on to the Minister of Agriculture, and the result is that the question appears on the Order Paper to-day as Number 98, which precludes me altogether from having a reply to it in the House. This question involves a matter of great importance to my constituency. As I say, it deals with unemployment, a subject which, I understand, belongs to the Department of the lord Privy Seal, but without any consultation with me the question has been handed over to the Minister of Agriculture, and I have no opportunity whatever of getting a public answer to it. The question deals with quarries and the difference between the quarries being able to work and not being able to work may depend on the answer.

Major MCKENZIE WOOD: May I say that I have had exactly the same experience.

Mr. SPEAKER: Hon. Members must bear in mind that the only Ministers who can answer questions are those in charge of the particular Departments to which the questions refer, and there is no possible way out of that position.

Major OWEN: But surely this is a question about unemployment.

Mr. SPEAKER: As to the position of the hon. and gallant Member's question on the Order Paper, may I point out that, if we could get through a few more questions in the day, we should be able to reach No. 98 with some ease. There is, however, a congestion of these questions, particularly on Tuesdays—I cannot tell why—and it is that congestion which prevents us from getting as many questions asked as I would like.

Colonel HOWARD-BURY: May I ask your advice, Mr. Speaker, in relation to the same matter. Tuesday is the only day upon which we can put questions to the Postmaster-General, and to-day the first question to the Postmaster-General is No. 82 on the Paper, and there are questions addressed to that Minister. On Tuesday, as you, Sir, have rightly said, questions appear to go very slowly, but, could not we adopt, as regards the Postmaster-General's questions, a rota similar to that which has been adopted
with questions addressed to the Board of Trade, the Scottish Office, and the Lord Privy Seal, so that, at least once in every five weeks, we should have a chance of putting questions to the Postmaster-General?

Mr. SPEAKER: I would point cut that No. 82 is not very far down on the list.

Colonel HOWARD-BURY: But it has not been reached.

Mr. SPEAKER: Perhaps if the hon. and gallant Member would assist me, we would be able to get through the questions more quickly.

Major ROSS: I also desire to ask your guidance, Sir, on this point. I have put several questions down to the Postmaster-General, but for weeks those questions have not been reached, and, apparently, one can never get questions answered m the House by the Postmaster-General. Would it not be possible to devise some scheme such as has been suggested by my hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Chelmsford (Colonel Howard-Bury)?

NATIONALITY OF MARRIED WOMEN (No. 2).

Captain CAZALET: I beg to move,
That leave be given to bring in a Bill to allow women marrying foreigners freedom to retain their nationality.
I hope I shall be able to prove to the House, in a very few sentences, that this Bill is one that deserves the support of Members in all quarters. On several previous occasions, Motions and Resolutions based on the same principle as underlies this Bill have received the unanimous approval of the House. Hon. Members are no doubt aware that by the Nationalisation Act, 1870, a British woman, on marrying a foreigner, loses her right to British citizenship, and this Bill seeks to restore to women the rights that were taken away from them by that Act. The inequalities between men and women that exist to-day in relation to nationality form one of the most glaring anomalies of our social system. The day has gone by when it was true to say:
A woman, a dog, and a walnut tree, The more you beat them, the better they be,
but to-day women are still included in this matter among minors and lunatics,
in that they are under a disability as compared with men.
Clause 1 of this Bill gives to an Englishwoman on marrying a foreigner the right to retain her nationality if she desires to do so, and the other Clauses of the Bill merely carry out the logical consequences of Clause 1. Their object is to make the conditions and regulations for women, as regards the acquiring and retaining of British citizenship, the same as are enjoyed by and applicable to men to-day; in other words, that there shall be no distinction based on sex in the law and practice relating to nationality. Many other countries, including the united States of America, have already taken legislative action along these lines, and therefore if an Englishwoman marries a citizen of one of those countries, she is in a peculiarly difficult and awkward position.
May I give the House one illustration? Supposing an Englishwoman marries an American, she thereby loses her British citizenship, but she cannot acquire American citizenship until she has resided in the United States of America for 12 months. Now it often happens that her husband is engaged in some business in Europe, or some other part of the world other than the United States, in which case she cannot fulfil the qualification necessary to attain American citizenship, it may be, for a long period of years, and I think that in those cases she exists on the promiscuous charity of some Consul who gives her a temporary passport. Those of us who support this Measure realise that there may be certain difficulties, and as long as the law in foreign countries is different, difficulties there will be. Difficulties there may be, but we maintain that injustice and inequalities there should not be; and if we can remove the latter, as it is in our power to do, I think we can go a long way towards solving the former.
4.0 p.m.
The choice which the House has to make to-day is between legal conveniences on the one hand and human rights on the other, and I think that public opinion will endorse the decision of this House when it comes down on the side of human rights. In conclusion, we desire that this Measure should pass at this moment, because on 13th March next there will be held, at The Hague, a
Codification Conference which will discuss this matter, and we desire our delegates to that Conference to go armed and fortified with the unanimous approval of this House upon this matter. We also desire this subject to be discussed by the Imperial Conference when it meets in October, and that the principle underlying this Measure should be extended throughout the British Dominions. Finally, I would like to say that no fewer than 70 women's organisations within the Empire and 52 women's organisations in this country give their hearty support to this Measure, and the only surprising thing to me is, that that being the case, why it has not become the law of the land a long time ago. For these reasons, I hope that the House will give this Measure not only a passive acceptance, but a clear and heartfelt welcome.

Question put, and agreed to.

Bill ordered to be brought in by Captain Cazalet, Miss Wilkinson, Miss Picton-Turbervill, Countess of Iveagh, Sir Gervais Rentoul, Mr. Llewellyn-Jones, Mr. Marjoribanks, and Mr. Hannon,

NATIONALITY OF MARRIED WOMEN (No. 2) BILL,

"to allow women marrying Foreigners freedom to retain their nationality," presented accordingly, and read the First time; to be read a Second time Tomorrow; and to be printed. [Bill 129.]

CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES (EMANCIPATION).

Sir GERALD HURST: I beg to move,
That leave be given to bring in a Bill to prohibit the funds and profits of cooperative societies from being made liable to contribute to any political party or cause,
This Bill will do something to bring help to some 6,000,000 people in this country who, at the present time, are either suffering injustice or are liable to suffer injustice by having funds, which they have acquired and accumulated for the purpose of trade, diverted to partisan political purposes. It came as a great shock to members of co-operative societies in this country when a Bill was introduced earlier in the Session designed to remove some of their grievances, but leaving this principal grievance of theirs
without-redress. They were very grateful, indeed, when, owing to the noble stand that was made in Committee by various hon. Members on these benches, an Amendment was passed in order to give them the redress for which they were longing, but, unfortunately, no sooner had their grievance been redressed than the Bill was withdrawn.
What is the wrong of which these cooperative societies complain 2 They complain that at the present time—and it is a fact—that where the rules of the cooperative society allow of it, a majority is able legally to divert funds and profits which have been acquired on behalf of all the members of the society, in order to finance a party of which a minority may entirely disapprove, and whose policy may be wholly abhorrent to them. This power of the majority has not been abused in any case where a majority of the co-operative society happens to belong to either of the constitutional parties, but it is an unfortunate thing that where the majority in many cases happens to be Socialist, large funds have been diverted from their proper purpose, and have been spent on financing elections and financing propaganda between elections. The money which has been so acquired does not belong to a majority; it belongs to the whole society, and it must be borne in mind that were we ever to have, which Heaven forbid, Socialism in our time, it would mean the destruction of all enterprises owned by cooperative societies, and also the confiscation of all the share and loan capital belonging to individual co-operators.
The remedy which this modest little Bill of mine proposes will leave every member of every co-operative society perfectly free, if he or she is willing, to contribute to any party to which he or she may belong. Members if they wish can dispose of their assets for the benefit of the Socialist party, or of any other party which, like the Socialist, preys upon the gullibility of mankind. The case for this Bill is based upon two great principles—first of all, the principle of freedom. The co-operative society came into being for the purpose of buying and distributing goods for use and consumption. Its purpose is entirely alien from the purpose of a political party. It has no more right to spend the money of its members on a
partisan policy without their consent than has a tennis or bowling club. There are hon. Members opposite who sympathise very much with the depressed peasantry of India or Egypt; will they do nothing for the wage-slaves of England? The second ground for our Bill is the intolerable hardship which this misuse of co-operative funds involves upon its members. It is easy to imagine anywhere in the industrial north a struggling home in which the family belongs to a co-operative society, waiting for the annual dividend, and, instead of having handed over the annual dividend which they ought to receive, finding that it has been grievously cut down by the diversion of co-operative funds for the purpose of financing the Socialist party.
This one-Clause Bill is a Bill which has support in every quarter of the House where there is any love of liberty still lingering, and even in the Liberal party, I am glad to say, are some of the backers—at any rate one of them has given his name. I hope, therefore, that this Bill will be treated as a non-contentious one, and will be as welcome as the Bill just introduced by my hon. and gallant Friend. I would suggest to the Front Bench opposite that, assuming this Bill receives its First Reading to-day, they would be well advised to give its further stages every possible facility. If they do that, when they go to the country they will be able to say that among the mass of bad Bills they passed, there was one good Bill, and they would be able to say, "It is true that a Socialist Government has increased unemployment, depressed industry and made most homes in this country more unhappy and poorer than when it came in, but, at all events, we have done one thing: we have given facilities to this one-Clause Bill, which enables members of co-operative societies to be freed from the shackles of political persecution."

Mr. HERBERT GIBSON: I cannot help but notice the ever-increasing interest which the hon. Gentleman takes in this subject, and my first observation is that of all the Private Members' Motions to which I have listened in this House, none has been a greater abuse of Private Members' time than this one; in fact, I could not quite decide whether I was listening to a farce or a comic opera. I am opposing this Bill because it im-
poses a condition that it has no right to impose on a co-operative society, which is an organisation of members for business reasons, and also for an ideal. It is establishing the principle that these members may combine for any other purpose, but not to defend their political interests and their political advancement. It is saying that they shall have no power to decide how they shall spend their own money. [HON. MEMBERS: "It is the other way round."] It is a Bill which says that they shall not be able to decide how they shall spend their own money. It is telling the 6,000,000 co-operators that while private banks, private railways, private breweries, private electrical companies and private food companies may send their managing and other directors to this House to protect their interests, co-operative societies shall not have the same privilege.
Co-operators have two ways of protecting their interests in this House. One way is to send to this House men from their own ranks who have an interest in their ideal and particular form of business and to pay for that representation. The other is to send our business opponents to this House to look after our interests. Our business opponents are always getting up and saying what a fine movement it is. They are always giving lip-service, but they never lose an opportunity to weaken this organisation. The second

method has been tried. We have relied upon our opponents to try to defend us in this House, with the result, which we could only expect, that we have always been let down, especially in War time. We have had, therefore, to adopt the first course, and send men from our own ranks interested in the ideal and business of co-operation, and to pay for that representation. So successful have we been in this method that we have the spectacle of the hon. and learned Member for Moss Side (Sir G. Hurst) coming here to-day and proposing that it shall stop. That is the crux of the matter and I suggest that every Member of this House should oppose this Motion, first because it is a denial of liberty to people to say how they shall spend their own money; secondly, because it is an attempt to put members of the co-operative movement, the great majority of whom are working-class men and women, at a political disadvantage; and, thirdly, because it will limit and restrict what, to my mind, is the finest example of working-class achievement—the Co-operative movement.

Question put, "That leave be given to bring in a Bill to prohibit the funds and profits of co-operative societies from being made liable to contribute to any political party or cause."

The House divided: Ayes, 191; Noes, 265.

Division No. 176.]
AYES.
[4.15 p.m.


Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel
Bullock, Captain Malcolm
Everard, W. Lindsay


Ainsworth, Lieut.-Col. Charles
Burton, Colonel H. W.
Falle, Sir Bertram G.


Albery, Irving James
Butler, R. A.
Ferguson, Sir John


Alexander, Sir Wm. (Glasgow, Cent'l)
Cadogan, Major Hon. Edward
Fermoy, Lord


Allen, Sir J. Sandeman (Liverp'l., W.)
Castle Stewart, Earl of
Fielden, E. B.


Allen, W. E. D. (Belfast, W.)
Cautley, Sir Henry S.
Fison, F. G. Clavering


Ashley, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Wilfrid W.
Cayzer, Sir C. (Chester, City)
Ford, Sir P. J.


Astor, Maj. Hon. John J. (Kent, Dover)
Cayzer, Maj. Sir Herbt. R. (Prtsmth, S.)
Forestier-Walker, Sir L.


Astor, Viscountess
Cazalet, Captain Victor A.
Ganzonl, Sir John


Atholl, Duchess of
Chadwick, Sir Robert Burton
Gault, Lieut.-Col. Andrew Hamilton


Baillie-Hamilton, Hon. Charles W.
Chamberlain, Rt. Hn. Sir J. A. (Birm., W.)
Gibson, C. G. (Pudsey & Otley)


Baldwin, Rt. Hon. Stanley (Bewdley)
Christle, J. A.
Glyn, Major R. G. C.


Balfour, George (Hampstead)
Churchill, Rt. Hon. Winston Spencer
Gower, Sir Robert


Balfour, Captain H. H. (I. of Thanet)
Cockerill, Brig.-General Sir George
Graham, Fergus (Cumberland, N.)


Balniel, Lord
Colman, N. C. D.
Gratlan-Doyle, Sir N.


Beaumont, M. W.
Colville, Major D. J.
Gretton, Colonel Rt. Hon. John


Bellairs, Commander Carlyon
Courtauld, Major J. S.
Gritten, W. G. Howard


Berry, Sir George
Courthope, Colonel Sir G. L.
Guinness, Rt. Hon. Walter E.


Bevan, S. J. (Holborn)
Crichton-Stuart, Lord C.
Gunston, Captain D. W.


Birchall, Major Sir John Dearman
Croft, Brigadier-General Sir H.
Hacking, Rt. Hon. Douglas H.


Bird, Ernest Roy
Crookshank, Cpt. H. (Lindsey, Gainsbro)
Hamilton, Sir George (Ilford)


Blindell, James
Culverwell, C. T. (Bristol, West)
Hammersley, S. S.


Bourne, Captain Robert Croft
Cunliffe-Lister, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip
Hannon, Patrick Joseph Henry


Bowater, Col. Sir T. Vansittart
Davies, Dr. Vernon
Hartington, Marquess of


Bowyer, Captain Sir George E. W.
Davies, Maj. Geo. F. (Somerset, Yeovil)
Harvey, Major S. E. (Devon, Totnes)


Boyce, H. L.
Davison, Sir W. H, (Kensington, S.)
Haslam, Henry C.


Bracken, B.
Dawson, Sir Philip
Heneage, Lieut.-Colonel Arthur P.


Brass, Captain Sir William
Duckworth, G. A. V.
Hennessy, Major Sir G. R. J.


Briscoe, Richard George
Dugdale, Capt. T. L.
Hills, Major Rt. Hon. John Waller


Brown, Col. D. C. (N'th'ld., Hexham)
Edmondson, Major A. J.
Hope, Sir Harry (Forfar)


Brown, Brig.-Gen. H. C. (Berks, Newb'y)
Elliot, Major Walter E.
Howard-Bury, Colonel C K.


Buckingham, Sir H.
Erskine, Lord (Somerset, Weston-s. M.)
Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hackney, N.)


Hurd, Percy A.
Nicholson, Col. Rt. Hn. W. G. (Ptrsf'ld)
Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)


James, Lieut.-Colonel Hon. Cuthbert
Nield, Rt. Hon. Sir Herbert
Somerville, D. G. (Willesden, East)


Jones, Sir G. W. H. (Stoke New'gton)
Oman, Sir Charles William C.
Southby, Commander A. R. J.


Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)
O'Neill, Sir H.
Spender-Clay, Colonel H.


Kindersley, Major G. M.
Ormsby-Gore, Rt. Hon. William
Steel-Maitland, Rt. Hon. Sir Arthur


King, Commodore Rt. Hon. Henry D.
Owen, Major G. (Carnarvon)
Stewart, W. J. (Belfast, South)


Knox, Sir Alfred
Peake, Capt. Osbert
Sueter, Rear-Admiral M. F.


Lamb, Sir J. Q.
Penny, Sir George
Thomas, Major L. B (King's Norton)


Lambert, Rt. Hon. George (S. Molton)
Peters, Dr. Sidney John
Thomson, Sir F.


Lane Fox, Col. Rt. Hon. George R.
Peto, Sir Basil E. (Devon, Barnstaple)
Titchfield, Major the Marquess of


Law, Sir Alfred (Derby, High Peak)
Power, Sir John Cecil
Todd, Capt. A. J.


Leighton, Major B. E. P.
Pownall, Sir Assheton
Train, J.


Lewis, Oswald (Colchester)
Purbrick, R.
Tryon, Rt. Hon. George Clement


Locker-Lampson, Rt. Hon. Godfrey
Ramsay, T. B. Wilson
Turton, Robert Hugh


Long, Major Eric
Ramsbotham, H.
Vaughan-Morgan, Sir Kenyon


Lymington, Viscount
Remer, John R.
Ward, Lieut.-Col. Sir A. Lambert


McConnell, Sir Joseph
Richardson, Sir P. W. (Sur'y, Ch'te'y)
Wardlaw-Milne, J. S.


Macquisten, F. A.
Roberts, Sir Samuel (Ecclesall)
Warrender, Sir Victor


Mac Robert, Rt. Hon. Alexander M.
Rodd, Rt. Hon. Sir James Rennell
Waterhouse, Captain Charles


Makins, Brigadier-General E.
Ross, Major Ronald D.
Wells, Sydney R.


Margesson, Captain H. D.
Ruggles-Brise, Lieut.-Colonel E. A.
Williams, Com. C. (Devon, Torquay)


Marjoribanks, E. C.
Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)
Wilson, G. H. A. (Cambridge U.)


Meller, R. J.
Salmon, Major I.
Windsor-Clive, Lieut-Colonel George


Merriman, Sir F. Boyd
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)
Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl


Mitchell, Sir W. Lane (Streatham)
Sandeman, Sir N. Stewart
Wolmer, Rt. Hon. Viscount


Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. Sir B.
Savery, S. S.
Womersley, W. J.


Moore, Sir Newton J. (Richmond)
Simms, Major-General J.
Wood, Rt. Hon. Sir Kingsley


Moore, Lieut.-Colonel T. C. R. (Ayr)
Sinclair, Col, T. (Queen's U., Belfst)
Worthington-Evans, Rt. Hon. Sir L.


Morris, Rhys Hopkins
Skelton, A. N.
Young, Rt. Hon. Sir Hilton


Morrison, W. S. (Glos., Cirencester)
Smith, Louis W. (Sheffield, Hallam)



Morrison-Bell, Sir Arthur Clive
Smith, R. W. (Aberd'n & Kinc'dine, C.)
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.


Muirhead, A. J.
Smith-Carington, Neville W.
Sir Gerald Hurst and Lieut.-Colonel


Nicholson, O. (Westminster)
Smithers, Waldron
Sir G. Dairymple-White.


NOES.


Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife, West)
Cocks, Frederick Seymour
Hollins, A.


Adamson, W. M. (Staff., Cannock)
Compton, Joseph
Hopkin, Daniel


Addison, Rt. Hon. Dr. Christopher
Cove, William G.
Hudson, James H. (Huddersfield)


Aitchison, Rt. Hon. Craigle M.
Daggar, George
Isaacs, George


Alexander, Rt. Hon. A. V. (Hillsbro')
Dallas, George
John, William (Rhondda, West)


Alpass, J. H.
Dalton, Hugh
Johnston, Thomas


Ammon, Charles George
Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)
Jones, J. J. (West Ham, Silvertown)


Angell, Norman
Day, Harry
Jones, Rt. Hon Leif (Camborne)


Arnott, John
Denman, Hon. R. D.
Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)


Aske, Sir Robert
Dukes, C.
Jowett, Rt. Hon. F. W.


Attlee, Clement Richard
Duncan, Charles
Jowitt, Rt. Hon. Sir W. A.


Ayles, Walter
Ede, James Chuter
Kelly, W. T.


Baker, John (Wolverhampton, Bilston)
Edmunds, J. E.
Kennedy, Thomas


Baldwin, Oliver (Dudley)
Edwards, C. (Monmouth, Bedwellty)
Kenworthy, Lt.-Com Hon. Joseph M.


Barnes, Alfred John
Edwards, E. (Morpeth)
Kinley, J.


Batey, Joseph
Egan, W. H.
Kirkwood, D.


Beckett, John (Camberwell, Peckham)
Foot, Isaac
Knight, Holford


Bellamy, Albert
Forgan, Dr. Robert
Lang, Gordon


Benn, Rt. Hon. Wedgwood
Freeman, Peter
Lansbury, Rt. Hon. George


Bennett, Captain E. N. (Cardiff, Central)
Gardner, B. W. (West Ham, Upton)
Lathan, G.


Bennett, William (Battersea, South)
Gill, T. H.
Law, Albert (Bolton)


Benson, G.
Gillett, George M.
Law, A. (Rosendale)


Bevan, Aneurin (Ebbw Vale)
Gossling, A. G.
Lawrence, Susan


Bondfield, Rt. Hon. Margaret
Gould, F.
Lawrie, Hugh Hartley (Stalybridge)


Bowen, J. W.
Graham, D. M. (Lanark, Hamilton)
Lawson, John James


Bowerman, Rt. Hon. Charles W.
Graham, Rt. Hon. Wm. (Edin., Cent.)
Lawther, W. (Barnard Castle)


Broad, Francis Alfred
Greenwood, Rt. Hon. A. (Colne).
Leach, W.


Brockway, A. Fenner
Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)
Lee, Frank (Derby, N. E.)


Bromley, J.
Griffiths, T. (Monmouth, Pontypool)
Lee, Jennie (Lanark, Northern)


Brooke, W.
Groves, Thomas E.
Lees, J.


Brothers, M.
Grundy, Thomas W.
Lewis, T. (Southampton)


Brown, C. W. E. (Notts. Mansfield)
Hall, F. (York, W. R., Normanton)
Lloyd, C. Ellis


Brown, Ernest (Leith)
Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)
Logan, David Gilbert


Brown, James (Ayr and Bute)
Hall, Capt. W. P. (Portsmouth, C.)
Longbottom, A. W.


Buchanan, G.
Hamilton, Mary Agnes (Blackburn)
Longden, F.


Burgess, F. G.
Hardie, George D.
Lowth, Thomas


Buxton, C. R. (Yorks. W. R. Elland)
Harris, Percy A.
Lunn, William


Buxton, Rt. Hon. Noel (Norfolk, N.)
Hartshorn, Rt. Hon. Vernon
Macdonald, Gordon (Ince)


Calne, Derwent Hall
Hastings, Dr. Somerville
MacDonald, Rt. Hon. J. R. (Seaham)


Cameron, A. G.
Haycock, A. W.
MacDonald, Malcolm (Bassetlaw)


Cape, Thomas
Hayday, Arthur
McElwee, A.


Carter, W. (St. Pancras, S. W.)
Hayes, John Henry
McEntee, V. L.


Charleton, H. C.
Henderson, Right Hon. A. (Burnley)
McKinlay, A.


Chater, Daniel
Henderson, Thomas (Glasgow)
MacLaren, Andrew


Church, Major A. G.
Henderson, W. W. (Middx., Enfield)
MacNeill-Weir, L.


Clarks, J. S.
Herriotts, J.
McShane, John James


Cluse, W. S.
Hirst, G. H. (York W. R. Wentworth)
Malone, C. L'Estrange (N'thampton)


Clynes, Rt. Hon. John R.
Hoffman, P. C.
Mansfield, W.




March, S.
Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)
Sutton, J. E.


Marcus, M.
Riley, Ben (Dewsbury)
Taylor, R. A. (Lincoln)


Markham, S. F.
Riley, F. F. (Stockton-on-Tees)
Taylor, W. B. (Norfolk, S. W.)


Marley, J.
Roberts, Rt. Hon. F. O. (W. Bromwich)
Thomas, Rt. Hon. J. H. (Derby)


Marshall, Fred
Romeril, H. G.
Thorne, W. (West Ham, Plaistow)


Mathers, George
Rosbotham, D. S. T.
Thurtle, Ernest


Matters, L. W.
Rowson, Guy
Tillett, Ben


Maxton, James
Runciman, Rt. Hon. Walter
Tinker, John Joseph


Melville, Sir James
Salter, Dr. Alfred
Tout, W. J.


Messer, Fred
Sanders, W. S.
Townend, A. E.


Mills, J. E.
Sandham, E.
Trevelyan, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles


Milner, J.
Sawyer, G. F.
Turner, B.


Montague, Frederick
Scurr, John
Vaughan, D. J.


Morgan, Dr. H. B.
Sexton, James
Viant, S. P.


Morley, Ralph
Shaw, Rt. Hon. Thomas (Preston)
Walker, J.


Morrison, Herbert (Hackney, South)
Shepherd, Arthur Lewis
Wallace, H. W.


Morrison, Robert C. (Tottenham, N.)
Sherwood, G. H.
Wellhead, Richard C.


Mort, D. L.
Shield, George William
Watkins, F. C.


Moses, J. J. H.
Shiels, Dr. Drummond
Watson, W. M. (Dunfermline)


Mosley, Lady C. (Stoke-on-Trent)
Shillaker, J. F.
Wellock, Wilfred


Mosley, Sir Oswald (Smethwick)
Shinwell, E.
Welsh, James (Paisley)


Muff, G.
Short, Alfred (Wednesbury)
Welsh, James C. (Coatbridge)


Muggeridge, H. T.
Simmons, C. J.
West, F. R.


Naylor, T. E.
Sinkinson, George
Westwood, Joseph


Noel Baker, P. J.
Smith, Alfred (Sunderland)
Wheatley, Rt. Hon. J.


Oldfield, J. R.
Smith, Ben (Bermondsey, Rotherhithe)
Whiteley, Wilfrid (Birm., Ladywood)


Oliver, George Harold (Ilkeston)
Smith, Frank (Nuneaton)
Whiteley, William (Blaydon)


Oliver, P. M. (Man., Blackley)
Smith, H. B. Lees (Keighley)
Wilkinson, Ellen C.


Palin, John Henry
Smith, Rennie (Penistone)
Williams, David (Swansea. East)


Paling, Wilfrid
Smith, Tom (Pontefract)
Williams, Dr. J. H. (Llanelly)


Palmer, E. T.
Smith, W. R. (Norwich)
Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)


Parkinson, John Allen (Wigan)
Snell, Harry
Wilson, C. H. (Sheffield, Attercliffe)


Pethick-Lawrence, F. W.
Snowden, Rt. Hon. Philip
Wilson, J. (Oldham)


Phillips, Dr. Marlon
Snowden, Thomas (Accrington)
Wilson, R. J. (Jarrow)


Picton-Turbervill, Edith
Sorensen, R.
Winterton, G. E. (Leicester, Loughb'gh)


Pole, Major D. G.
Stamford, Thomas W.
Wise, E. F.


Potts, John S
Stephen, Campbell
Wood, Major McKenzie (Banff)


Price, M. P.
Stewart, J. (St. Rollox)
Wright, W. (Rutherglen)


Quibell, D. J. K.
Strachey, E. J. St. Loe
Young, R. S. (Islington, North)


Raynes, W. R.
Strauss, G. R.



Richards, R.
Sullivan, J.
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—




Mr. Perry and Mr. Hubert Gibson.

BLASPHEMY LAWS (AMENDMENT) BILL.

Reported, so far as amended, from Standing Committee B.

Leave given to the Committee to make a Special Report.

Special Report brought up, and read.

Report and Special Report to lie upon the Table, and to be printed.

Minutes of the Proceedings of the Standing Committee to be printed.

SELECTION (STANDING COMMITTEES).

STANDING COMMITTEE B.

Mr. Frederick Hall reported from the Committee of Selection; That they had discharged the following Members from Standing Committee B: Captain Cazalet, Major Leighton, and Major-General Simms; and had appointed in substitution: Dr. Vernon Davies, Mr. Hannon, and Brigadier-General Makins.

Mr. Frederick Hall further reported from the Committee; That they had added the following Fifteen Members to
Standing Committee B (in respect of the Canal Boats Bill): Mr. W. M. Adamson, Duchess of Atholl, Mr. Duncan, Lieut.-Colonel Fremantle, Mr. David Grenfell, Captain Gunston, Captain Austin Hudson, Miss Lawrence, Sir Donald Maclean, Mr. Morgan Jones, Sir Herbert Nield, Sir Rennell Rodd, Mr. Sexton, Sir Charles Trevelyan, and Earl Winterton.

STANDING COMMITTEE C.

Mr. Frederick Hall further reported from the Committee of Selection; That they had discharged the following Member from Standing Committee C: Lieut.-Colonel James; and had appointed in substitution: Mr. Remer.

Mr. Frederick Hall further reported from the Committee; That they had discharged the following Members from Standing Committee C (added in respect of the Road Traffic Bill [Lords]): Mr. Brooke and Mr. Watkins; and had appointed in substitution: Mr. Haycock and Mr. Marcus.

Mr. Frederick Hall further reported from the Committee of Selection; That they had added the following Thirty Members to Standing Committee C (in
respect of the Omnibuses Bill): the Lord Advocate, Colonel Ashley, Mr. Beckett, Captain Sir William Brass, Mr. Ernest Brown, Lord Erskine, Major Glyn, Marquess of Hartington, Major Harvey, Mr. Haycock, Major Hills, Colonel Howard-Bury, Sir Joseph Lamb, Mr. Lawrie, Mr. Leach, Mr. Llewellyn-Jones, Mr. Marcus, Mr. Duncan Millar, Mr. Herbert Morrison, Mr. George Oliver, Sir Gervais Rentoul, Major Salmon, Dr. Salter, Mr. Sanders, Mr. Short, Mr. W. Smith, the Solicitor-General, Mr. Strauss, Mr. James C. Welsh and Lieut.-Colonel Windsor-Clive.

Reports to lie upon the Table.

NAVY ESTIMATES, 1930.

Estimates presented,—for the Navy for the year 1930 [by Command]; Referred to the Committee of Supply, and to be printed.

CIVIL AND REVENUE DEPART- MENTS, 1930 (VOTE ON ACCOUNT).

Estimate presented,—showing the several Services for which a Vote on Account is required for the year ending 31st March, 1931 [by Command]; Referred to the Committee of Supply, and to be printed.

CIVIL AND REVENUE DEPART- MENTS (ESTIMATES, 1930).

Estimates presented,—for Civil and Revenue Departments for the year ending 31st March 1931, with Memorandum [by Command]; Referred to the Committee of Supply, and to be printed.

AIR ESTIMATES, 1930.

Estimates presented,—for the year 1930 [by Command]; Referred to the Committee of Supply, and to be printed.

Orders of the Day — COAL MINES BILL.

Considered in Committee, [Progress., 13th February.]

[Mr. ROBERT YOUNG in the Chair,]

PROPOSED CLAUSE.—(Constitution of Coal Mines Reorganisation Commission.)

The CHAIRMAN: The first two Amendments in the name of the hon. Member for Lancaster (Mr. Ramsbotham) will be taken together.

Mr. RAMSBOTHAM: I beg to move, as an Amendment to the proposed Clause, in line 3, after the word "appointed," to insert the words "by an Order made."
Then I have a consequential Amendment—in line 5, at the end, to insert the words:
and the Board of Trade shall, immediately after making such Order, lay it before each House of Parliament and unless either House within the next subsequent twenty days on which that House has sat after such Order is laid before it resolves that the order be not approved, the Order shall have effect as if it were a part of this Act"—
and the effect of them will be to provide that this House will have an opportunity of signifying approval of the composition of this Reorganisation Commission which is being set up under this Clause? I hope to convince the President of the Board of Trade and those who sit behind him that this is a very important Amendment and one of great substance, because upon it hang the powers of this House to have at least some voice in the composition, if not in the control, of this important body. Apart from this Amendment, there is nothing which gives this House any control or supervision over the Commission. As the Clause stands, the Board of Trade appoints the Commission, and the Board can make and unmake it, but the House has no say in it. If hon. Members will turn to another proposed new Clause, they will see how important some of the functions of the Commission are to be. It is to be trusted with the duty of facilitating the production, supply and sale of coal; of promoting and assisting, by the preparation of schemes and otherwise, the
amalgamation of undertakings; of holding inquiries; of employing technical and professional agents; of preparing schemes, and, in certain cases, certifying schemes as matters of national interest.
The President of the Board of Trade, a fortnight ago, indicated the kind of people he had in mind for the Commission. He said that the kind of people they would have on the Commission were a lawyer, a gentleman versed in coal mining organisation, and a gentleman of great industrial experience. What the right hon. Gentleman has in his mind as suitable components of this Commission is not quite the same as getting the approval of the House for those components. The Board of Trade may have—it has happened before—some inclination to appoint an ex-Government official, which is quite natural; or they may have an inclination to appoint an ex-mining official or a retired mining engineer.
There are some on both sides of the Committee who consider that the Commission should not consist of experts, but that they could have expert advisers if they required them: and they would like to have the opportunity of seeing who is going to be on the Commission before it is definitely set up. There are precedents in other Acts of Parliament, and had they been followed this Amendment would not have been necessary. In the Electricity Supply Act, 1919, if I remember rightly, it was laid down that the qualifications of three of the five members of the Commission, and the tenure of office of two of them, depended upon the decision of the Board of Trade, while the other three held office during His Majesty's pleasure. With regard to the Railways Amalgamation Tribunal, the Railways Act actually named the members, so that if there had been objection to any of them Members could have expressed their objection on the Floor of the House. Here, we lay down no restriction and no qualification, except the one that no member of the Commission must be a Member of Parliament. He may, however, be a person of very strong and well-known political convictions which may commend themselves to hon. Members on one side of the House or the other. For example, the Board of Trade might appoint Mr. A. J. Cook, and that would appeal to hon.
Members opposite—[Interruption.]—or some of them, but there might be dissension on this side—[Interruption.]—and on the other side. A prohibition against a Member of Parliament sitting on this Commission is not all that we require.
I think the Committee would like to know something more about the Commission. Hon. Members on both sides are jealous of the powers of Parliament, and all of us watch pretty carefully any attempts to encroach upon them by proposals to put more power into the hands of the bureaucracy than is necessary, and I suggest to hon. Members on both sides of the Committee that this is one of the occasions on which Parliament might assert itself and request the President of the Board of Trade to accept this Amendment, so that we may be satisfied as to the composition of the Commission. It is not a very glaring case of despotism, for there have been many worse, but it is one of those oases in which we might be vigilant; and I make this appeal not only to the President of the Board of Trade but to his followers, because they are just as jealous of the powers of Parliament as any other Members. I am reminded that in a previous Debate the hon. Member for Chislehurst (Mr. Smithers) achieved a great deal of success in mollifying the President of the Board of Trade by using a Latin quotation. I propose to try the same experiment. I am not going to confine myself to a quotation applying entirely to him, it will apply with more force to his followers. I am sure that with his great learning he will recognise this well-known line,
Flectere si nequeo superos, Acheronta movebo,
which, being interpreted, means "If I cannot persuade the gods to intervene I will stir up Hell."

Captain AUSTIN HUDSON: I hope the President of the Board of Trade will accept this Amendment. It has been put down after considerable thought, and it was specially framed to secure what, I think, is called "negative resolution procedure," that is to say, that when the names come before us the House need not necessarily give time for their discussion. Only when objection is taken will it be necessary for the attention of the House to be called to the subject and for a Debate, perhaps, to take place. If
there is a change in the personnel of the proposed Commission it will be possible for that change to be debated, but if there is merely a change over of two people in regard to whom nobody has any objection it will go through as a matter of course, and only those who are interested will really know anything about it. Since we first discussed the new Clause the number of the commissioners has been altered from three to five, and therefore this Amendment becomes all the more important, because the chances of their having to be changes are so much the greater. The hon. Member for Lancaster (Mr. Ramsbotham) drew attention to the fact that people are objecting more and more to government by what is called bureaucracy, government by Departments with little or no control by this House. That point of view has been brought to the fore on several occasions lately, and several times Ministers of the present Government have agreed to insert provisions of this kind in order to give that control which Parliament feels it should have, so that the House may be able to guard the privileges which it is giving. The Amendment is framed in a way to which I think nobody can object, and I hope the President of the Board of Trade will see his way to accept it.

Major COURTAULD: In supporting this Amendment I hardly think it is necessary for me to go much further than my hon. Friends have already gone, because I feel that the President of the Board of Trade must already be convinced and will agree to accept the Amendment as being thoroughly reasonable and one against which it is very hard to produce any arguments. In fact, I am inclined to the belief that the fact that this Amendment is not already embodied in the Clause is due only to an oversight. It must be realised that this is not only a matter of principle, but that it is a special case, and that if we do not accept the Amendment we are laying upon future Presidents of the Board of Trade an almost impossible undertaking. The task of this Commission, or committee, or panel, or tribunal as it has been variously described—I myself prefer the designation given by the right hon. Gentleman himself when he described them as "a body of men," because that, at least, tells us that it is not going to be a body of women—will be of the first magnitude, and of
stupendous difficulty. We can imagine this body going about the country seeking whom they can amalgamate. To find not less than five men in the country who are capable of carrying out this stupendous task must, in itself, be a matter of great difficulty. It would be asking too much of future Presidents of the Board of Trade to require them to carry out this duty and take sole responsibility for it.
I have no doubt the right hon. Gentleman in office at the moment would be quite capable of finding the five gentlemen, but we must look to the future, and must even envisage the possibility of a change of Government. It may be that in a few years' time we shall have a different party in office, and we do not know who will then be President of the Board of Trade. We are imposing on some unknown statesman of the future a task which his shoulders may not be broad enough to bear. If, as is possible, the party on this side form the next Government, I have no doubt that a President of the Board of Trade will be found to do the work; but there are other possibilities. There is always the possibility that the party below me—the Liberal party—may be entrusted with the task, though that may he going rather far into the realms of phantasy. I am informed also, by reading my daily Press, that there is yet another alternative. I am quite sure the Committee will not regard with calmness the possibility of five gentlemen being appointed by, perhaps, a gentleman on the staff of the "Daily Mail." This only shows that in order to secure the certainty of finding five supermen we should leave the final responsibility with this House and the other House, and not entrust the work solely to one Minister. I do not want to try to curdle the blood of hon. Members opposite by picturing other terrible possibilities, but I think there are others even worse. Probably my hon. Friends who spoke before me have already persuaded the President of the Board of Trade to accept this Amendment, but, if they have not already done so, I hope the few words which I have ventured to address to the Committee may succeed.

The SECRETARY for MINES (Mr. Ben Turner): I think it is safe to say that the proposal in the Bill follows the
usual procedure on the part of the Board of Trade. It has been usual for Parliament to grant authority to a Department to carry out functions of this character. There have not, I think, been many occasions in the past when Ministers have been unable to find the just and perfect men who were required. I think there are these just and perfect men in the kingdom, and I am certain that my chief the President of the Board of Trade will be able to secure their services, and that Parliament may be confident that his judgment—

Sir PHILIP CUNLIFFE-LISTER: What will be the way?

Mr. TURNER: The usual way of dealing with Parliamentary subjects as they arise and with reports that come along from the Board of Trade. I think the ingenuity of the right hon. Gentleman is so vast that he will never be at a loss to find a way. I am not able to follow the hon. Member for Lancaster (Mr. Ramsbotham) in his Latin quotation, but I think I can reply to him in a well-understood quotation from Yorkshire—"There's nowt in it." That is how I would put it. We are following the usual policy of all Governments in similar circumstances, and I think our procedure deserves the support of the Committee.

Sir P. CUNLIFFE-LISTER: The Secretary for Mines has just told us that our ingenuity will be able to find some way of challenging any appointments which the President of the Board of Trade may make. I wish to know definitely what opportunity we shall have of challenging these appointments? It is no use telling us that our ingenuity will find some way out of the difficulty unless the hon. Gentleman can, tell us the occasion upon which he suggests that we shall have an opportunity of challenging any appointments which may be made by the President of the Board of Trade. If the Secretary for Mines cannot give me an answer to that question now, perhaps he will consider the matter and inform us later on what is the occasion upon which we can challenge these appointments.
The only occasion which arises upon which we can challenge the administrative action of any Department is upon the Estimates for that particular Department. There is no other way in
which you can challenge their actions, and that is an opportunity which only occurs once a year. I know that is the occasion on which the President of the Board of Trade confesses his sins, but it is not satisfactory to have that confession of sins after they have been committed. I want power to intervene before the sins have been committed when I see the Minister entering into temptation in order that I can draw him back again into the straight and narrow path. It is no good telling me that we shall be able to find some opportunity As I have already stated, the only opportunity of challenging the administration of the Department is when the particular Vote for that Department comes before the House, and that Vote may be taken long after the action which it is sought to challenge has been done. Therefore, a suggestion of that kind is wholly unsatisfactory.
The Secretary for Mines has told us that we can follow the ordinary procedure in this matter, but that is what is proposed by our Amendment. We propose a procedure under which the House of Commons shall have an opportunity of expressing its dissent in a manner which is perfectly well known. The Amendment lays it down that an Order shall be laid on the Table of the House in the usual way. The Secretary for Mines has stated that under the new Clause the Government are proceeding according to precedent, but I could quote hundreds of precedents where the Board of Trade has to come to this House and lay Orders in regard to gas legislation. In that case, what has the Board of Trade to do? The President does not make Orders which can only be challenged when the Vote for his Department comes up in Committee of Supply, but in every case he makes an Order which lies on the Table for 21 days, and anyone who wishes to challenge that Order has a right to do so. In the case of electricity Orders which often affect only one particular place the Department has to lay those Orders, and, if anybody wishes to challenge them, a Prayer is put down. The whole of the precedents I have quoted are in fvaour of this proposal.
I feel sure that when the President of the Board of Trade considers this point, he will see that this Amendment is not
only in accordance with precedent, but it is also a very reasonable one. The question we are dealing with is not merely the appointment of an Advisory Committee, but it is a Commission which will have considerable executive powers. This Commission may go round to the coal mines and make proposals which are going to affect every single mining undertaking in this country. Some hon. Members below the Gangway have stated that this new Clause is so far-reaching that it is almost a substitute for Part I of the Bill. We want to know who is going to exercise these important functions, even if the commissioners have only the moderate powers which have been stated by the President of the Board of Trade. These proposals are far-reaching in their terms, and I think we ought to know who are going to be appointed as commissioners. It is all the more important that we should have this information because there is no Clause in the Bill to show how the commissioners will be appointed, and the President of the Board of Trade can appoint anybody he likes.
It is not laid down in this new Clause that one of the gentlemen appointed shall be a barrister, an accountant, or a mining engineer, and it is not provided by Statute that those appointed must have special qualifications. The right hon. Gentleman can appoint any five people whom he likes. He may be very reasonable; but that has never been put forward before as a reason for not putting an Act of Parliament into proper form. We have to consider what are the general powers being conferred, and in this matter the right hon. Gentleman will have the widest possible powers. There are no controlling words over the men to be appointed, although, in far less important cases, the regular course is to come down to the House of Commons and lay an Order on the Table., If the President of the Board of Trade will give us an assurance that in this matter he will act strictly in accordance with a multitude of precedents, he will convince the House that he is acting reasonably, and I think that is something which we have a reasonable right to demand.

Mr. BEAUMONT: I share the disappointment which has been expressed by the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Hendon (Sir P. Cunliffe-Lister) at
the speech which has been made by the Minister for Mines, who claimed that the usual procedure was being adopted in making appointments of this kind. That is not so, and it is because we want the usual procedure which is adopted in matters less important than this instance that we are pressing forward this Amendment. After all, we are elected to govern the country. We have no objection on this side of the House to any nomination of the President of the Board of Trade, particularly if he follows the admirable rule laid down by the Chancellor of the Exchequer. This is a question of democratic control. The body to be appointed has to deal with one of the most important industries in the country, and one on which the life of the country depends. Therefore, it is not unreasonable for us to ask that Parliament should have a say in the appointment. After all, there is no getting away from the fact that we are continually falling more and more under departmental and bureaucratic control, and that is what we are anxious to get away from. I think that is common to all parties, and I know that hon. Members opposite have made a similar claim. For these reasons, I hope the President of the Board of Trade will see his way to accept this Amendment, and give Parliament real control over a body which will have to look after one of our greatest industries.

Mr. SMITHERS: I want to impress upon the Committee the importance of the body to be appointed under this Clause. I am afraid hon. Members do not fully realise the responsibility that will devolve upon these five commissioners. I should like the President of the Board of Trade to tell us what objection he can possibly have to this Amendment. The right hon. Gentleman proposes to appoint five members on this Commission. I do not wish to press this point too far, but can the right hon. Gentleman tell us the five people whom he has in mind. I would suggest that he should appoint a barrister, an accountant, a mining engineer, and a surveyor.

The CHAIRMAN: That point does not arise on this Amendment, which deals with the question of an Order being laid upon the Table of the House.

Mr. SMITHERS: In view of the tremendous responsibility which will be placed upon the right hon. Gentleman,
the large area which the commissioners cover, and the enormous amount of money which they may spend in organisation schemes, I ask the President of the Board of Trade to tell us who he has in mind. I cannot see what objection there can be to allowing the Committee to have power to object to an Order of this kind. In the case of gas and electricity industries, which are minor matters compared with the one we are discussing, it is necessary to lay the Order, and I cannot see what objection there can be to granting the same power in regard to a question which affects the whole country. Gas and electricity Orders only affect certain rural areas, and it seems to me that the House should have the right to object in the case we are dealing with. The President of the Board of Trade has just returned from truce negotiations for another purpose. We are now restarting the Debates on the Coal Bill, and I hope the right hon. Gentleman will commence with another truce.

5.0 p.m.

Commodore DOUGLAS KING: I was rather surprised at the reply which has been given by the Government to the very strong arguments which were put forward by the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Hendon. On this side of the House we look upon this question as one of very great importance. We are simply asking that the House of Commons shall have an opportunity of reviewing, step by step, the action which the Government propose to take. The Secretary for Mines did not meet any of the points raised by those who supported this Amendment, and he simply said that we were raising ghosts. The only ghosts we are raising are Members of the House of Commons, and we have a right to decide whether the new procedure which is being adopted under this Clause is the right one or not. Throughout this Bill we are seeking to mitigate the evils of it as much as possible. In various Amendments the President of the Board of Trade will find that we are seeking, in place of the autocratic rulings of the Board of Trade, to insert a rule governing the power of the House of Commons. The Amendment calls only for what is known as a negative motion. It says that the Order shall be laid on the Table of the House, and that if not objected to it should become law after 20 days. It is a very moderate request.
In other later Amendments with regard to other procedure we ask for a positive Resolution of the House in favour of what the Government propose to do. We consider that it is of the greatest importance to both sides in the coal industry, and to the consumers, that Parliament should have an opportunity step by step of controlling this entirely new procedure. The Secretary for Mines told us that he was adopting the usual procedure in such cases. But there never has been such a case before; we have never had compulsory amalgamations before. In this case every single unit in a proposed amalgamation may object to amalgamation, yet it can be compelled. We have never had such a thing in the history of the country. We have had strong powers given by Parliament in the past, and in some cases people have been deprived of property for the public good, but always under compensation. But this is an entirely new procedure. The proposal is that people should unwillingly be banded together, however unsuitable they may think themselves for amalgamation, and whatever personal feelings they may have.

The CHAIRMAN: The hon. and gallant Gentleman is now extending the scope of the discussion.

Commodore KING: I do not wish to do that. No usual procedure can apply to such a wholly unusual course as is proposed in the Bill. We cannot possibly ensure that the right people will be selected unless we have an opportunity of knowing their names beforehand. I quite agree with the Secretary for Mines that there are just and perfect men to be found for this as for other purposes, but at the same time we want Parliament to have the opportunity of considering whether they are just and perfect men; we want to know whether the opinion expressed by the officials or the President of the Board of Trade with regard to a certain set of men is well founded, and whether they have chosen the best men to undertake the work. In all these things we must have the greatest possible measure of Parliamentary control at every step.
The commissioners are to have power to go round the country and to plan amalgamations without any request from the coalowners concerned. Unless the right men are chosen, all those inquiries
may be an extremely vexatious and unjustifiable interference with the ordinary business of the different units that it is proposed to amalgamate, and if the commissioners are not fully qualified for their work they may quite well put the different units to very great financial expense. The coalowners may have to engage counsel and expert advisers. The expenses of the commissioners, of course, will be covered by the Bill. I have the greatest respect for the judgment which is usually displayed by the Board of Trade, and I say that from my experience of the permanent officials during the last few years. On the other hand, we have to deal with the political management of the Board of Trade; we have to see that on the political side these duties are carried out properly. An hon. Friend referred to the Railways Bill. The Secretary for Mines must have forgotten that when he was dealing with the subject. There was a very similar duty imposed on the Railways Tribunal. They had not only to go into the proposals which the railway companies put up, but if after a certain lapse of time the railway companies did not put forward schemes—

The CHAIRMAN: It is not in order for the hon. and gallant Member to go into the details of that. It is in order for him to say as an argument that in the case of the railway amalgamations there were similar duties.

Commodore KING: Again I was only trying to enforce my argument on the President of the Board of Trade. The Railways Tribunal had imposed upon them, under the Railways Act, duties similar to some of those to be imposed on the Coal Commission, but their duties did not go nearly as far, because the railway amalgamations were of a wholly different kind. They were to be amalgamations of similar interests, whereas the amalgamations under this Bill ace to be amalgamations of wholly dissimiliar interests and in many eases of conflicting interests. Therefore, the duties of these commissioners are far more important and onerous than the duties placed on the other tribunal. Under the Railways Act, not only was this House given an opportunity of discussing who the people should be, but their names were actually set out in the Act. We are entitled to demand Parliamentary control in the
present case, and this is the first Amendment in which we are seeking to maintain that control. I urge the President of the Board of Trade to accept the Amendment and to allow Parliament to carry out its proper function of saying whether the appointments are right or wrong.

The PRESIDENT of the BOARD of TRADE (Mr. William Graham): It is remarkably difficult to resist the reference to the truce, and still less the appeal which has been made from the other side, but, after all, the point before the House is a comparatively narrow and simple one. It is whether the appointments of the five commissioners and of the Chairman are to be made by the Board of Trade by the ordinary departmental process, or whether procedure is to be by an order to be submitted for the negative approval of this House. I support my hon. Friend the Secretary for Mines in the view that the condition which the Opposition seek to impose is really unnecessary, and that there is no valid precedent for it within recent times. The right hon. Member for Hendon (Sir P. Cunliffe-Lister) asked what kind of protection Parliament would have. Of course, when the actual appointment of the commissioners is being made the names will be mentioned in reply to any Parliamentary question. Any hon. Member; can raise a discussion on the Adjournment, and of course the administration and work of these commissioners can be raised either on a Vote of the Coal Mines Department, or on the Vote of the Board of Trade itself. Those are the usual Parliamentary opportunities and I suggest that they are sufficient, and that it is quite unnecessary to burden this part of the Bill with the formality of laying an order on the Table.
Hon. Members opposite are quite wrong in suggesting that there is any effective comparison between the proposals of the Bill and the Electricity Acts or with the Railways Act of 1921. The Chair has ruled that we must not embark on the merits of that legislation, so I shall content myself with saying that in the case of the Electricity Acts there had already been a basis in previous legislation, and that to a large extent this was a regulated industry. In other words, there was a set of circumstances which do not in any way correspond to the circum-
stances before us in the case of this Bill. As regards the Railways Act of 1921, it was not the duty of the three commissioners named to frame schemes of amalgamation. That was already done by a very elaborate process covering more than 100 constituent railway companies, and all that the commissioners had to do was to approve the conditions under which the amalgamations were to take place. In other words, the ground was very largely covered. That is not the case in this Bill, and I suggest that the analogy is entirely unreal.
Hon. Members have also tried to make something of the point that this is an extension of departmental or bureaucratic control. All of us on this side want to preserve to the fullest possible extent the powers of Members of Parliament, but we must have some common sense in the matter. If trifling and even important appointments are not to be entrusted to the appropriate Departments, there will be further congestion of business on the Floor of the House, and we shall be lost in what is in reality administration and not legislation at all. I suggest that the Bill is perfectly reasonable in this proposal, and, with all the good will in the world, such as has characterised these Debates from the beginning, it is impossible to accept this Amendment,

Captain CAZALET: Many Members on this side of the Committee, I think, regret very much that the President of the Board of Trade is unable to accept this Amendment. We had hoped that he would have brought back with him that sweet reasonableness with which he has been indulging the delegates at Geneva, and I think it would have augured well for the further stages of the Bill if he had been able to accept this most reasonable and sensible Amendment. It is highly important that these five men should receive the support, not only of Members on the opposite side of the House, but the general support of the country and the support of Members on these benches and below the Gangway. Unless they have the general good will of the community, their work will be vitiated from the very start.
The President of the Board of Trade has suggested that, in moving an Amendment of this nature, we desire to hold up the business of the House, and he even
referred to the appointment of these five men as a trifling appointment. [Interruption.] I am very glad to hear that hon. Members opposite do consider these appointments to be of vital importance, both to the coal industry and to the general well-being of the country. If the five names are acceptable to hon. Members in all parts of the House, there will be no delay. The Order will be laid on the Table of the House, and, if the names are acceptable, the subject will not be debated and there will be the least possible delay. It is only if we see reason to object to any of these nominated individuals that there will be a Debate and time will be taken up, but, surely, the right bon. Gentleman will see that, if there is disagreement as to the position and qualifications of any of these gentlemen, their work will be vitiated from the start, and they will not be able to fulfil the functions which they were originally intended to fulfil.
If we cannot get some more satisfactory answer from the right hon. Gentleman, I think it will be our duty, at some later stage of the Bill, to try to introduce Amendments to ensure that these five individuals belong to certain categories of industry—for instance, that one should be a banker, one a barrister, and so on. I am not going to develop that matter now, but it is obvious that, if the President of the Board of Trade will not give us the right to say whether we approve or disapprove—and this is the only opportunity that we shall have of making our voices heard on this matter—we shall be compelled at a later stage to introduce Amendments to ensure that the members of this body will represent the views that we think should be represented on a committee of this kind.
We regard with no little concern the sinister silence of hon. Members on the Liberal Benches in reference to this matter. Is this another bargain? Whatever other faiths the Liberal party may cling to, we have always associated with them the liberty of the subject and the scrutiny by the representatives of this democratic country of all Measures that come before the House of Commons. We consider these to be the closely cherished and highly prized traditions of the Liberal party, but here they have a first-class opportunity of putting their views before the Committee in support of an eminently
reasonable Amendment, and there is complete silence on their beaches. [Interruption.] It is, indeed, the result of the almost complete emptiness of those benches when we are discussing a matter which we consider to be of the gravest importance, but which they, apparently, consider to be of no importance whatever, I hope that, in view of the speeches which have been made from these benches, and of our desire to carry forward this Measure with the greatest possible amount of good will some hon. Member opposite will see his way to accede to this Amendment.

Major GEORGE DAVIES: I want to stress one consideration which, while it has been touched upon, has not in my opinion been sufficiently emphasised. On this side of the Committee, as the Secretary for Mines will appreciate, we set great store by this Amendment, because we think that it enshrines an essential part of this legislation. I would like hon. Members opposite to consider this point of view. The Secretary for Mines, in his Second Reading speech on the Bill, pointed out what a tremendously important piece of legislation it was, and how he earnestly looked forward to its bringing, at last, peace and prosperity to an industry which has been so torn with disputes and lack of prosperity in the past; and that it was of the greatest importance that the provisions of the Bill should be calculated from the start to achieve his objective. The Clauses which we have been discussing were not originally part of the Measure. They were added for reasons into which it is not necessary to go now, but a majority of the House agreed that they were an essential, or at any rate a necessary, part of the Measure.
What is this Clause going to do? It is all very well for the Secretary for Mines to say that it is a usual procedure. As my right hon. and gallant Friend the Member for South Paddington (Commodore King) has pointed out, this is a most unusual case. For the first time in the history of this country, the House of Commons as a body is making itself responsible for the manner in which one of the industries of the country shall be carried on in detail and in general. That is an enormous responsibility for us all, in whatever quarter of the House we sit, because we are bound by the
majority which will pass this Measure. On these benches, our objective is to consider how we think that this Measure will work when it is put into operation, and to try, as far as possible, to see that it is a better and not a worse Measure when it leaves the House of Commons.
These Clauses really introduce the most important part of the whole Bill, that is to say, the Coal Mines Reorganisation Commission, who are going to be the spokesmen of the expressed will of the House of Commons and to put into operation provisions which, possibly, will entirely revolutionise the system of our coal-mining industry. No more important task has ever been entrusted by Parliament to any body of men, however eminent, however able, and however expert they may be in their particular spheres of life. At the same time, we are providing that the President of the Board of Trade shall have supreme control of the appointments, without Parliament having any opportunity, except the trivial ones which the right hon. Gentleman outlined, of having any voice in the matter.
This is not a question of whether the Conservative party are going to try to express disapproval. It appeals to hon. Members opposite just as much as to anyone else. Time and again from our-back benches we have held up a hand of warning to occupants of our own Front

Bench who had shown that tendency, which seems to be inseparable from those who hold ministerial positions, of trying to rely entirely on their own Departments. They have, quite rightly, complete confidence in their Departments, but they forget that their ultimate master is the House of Commons. We are not trying to put, as it were, spokes into the wheels, but we do suggest that this provision for what is called a negative approval is a proper one, in the interests, not of the Conservative party, but of the House of Commons itself, because on the success of these appointments will depend the realisation of the whole object of those who believe, as we think mistakenly, that the result of this Bill is going to be for the welfare of the mining industry and of our people. We, therefore, attach the greatest importance to this Amendment, and are correspondingly disappointed that both the President of the Board of Trade and the Secretary for Mines, and also, as far as I can make out, hon. Members generally on the opposite benches, fail to realise that this is not a party question, but a House of Commons question. I believe that this House of Commons and our successors will have cause to regret that it is not possible to accept this Amendment.

Question put. "That those words be there inserted in the proposed Clause."

The Committee divided: Ayes, 173; Noes, 283.

Division No. 177.]
AYES.
[5.28 p.m.


Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel
Cautley, Sir Henry S.
Ferguson, Sir John


Albery, Irving James
Cayzer, Sir C. (Chester, City)
Fison, F. G. Clavering


Alexander, Sir Wm. (Glasgow, Cent'l)
Cayzer, Maj. Sir Herbt. R. (Prtsmth, S.)
Forestier-Walker, Sir L


Allen, Sir J. Sandeman (Liverp'l., W.)
Cazalet, Captain Victor A.
Fremantle, Lieut.-Colonel Francis E.


Amery, Rt. Hon. Leopold C. M. S.
Chadwick, Sir Robert Burton
Galbraith, J. F. W.


Ashley, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Wilfrid W.
Chamberlain, Rt. Hn. Sir J. A. (Birm., W.)
Ganzonl, Sir John


Astor, Viscountess
Christie, J. A.
Gault, Lieut.-Col. Andrew Hamilton


Atholl, Duchess of
Churchill, Rt. Hon. Winston Spencer
Gibson, C. G. (Pudsey & Otley)


Baillie-Hamilton, Hon. Charles W.
Cockerill, Brig.-General Sir George
Glyn, Major R. G. C.


Baldwin, Bt. Hon. Stanley (Bowdley)
Colman, N. C. D.
Gower, Sir Robert


Balfour, George (Hampstead)
Colville, Major D. J.
Grace, John


Beaumont, M. W.
Courtauld, Major J. S.
Graham, Fergus (Cumberland, N.)


Bellairs, Commander Carlyon
Courthope, Colonel Sir G. L.
Grattan-Doyle, Sir N.


Berry, Sir George
Crichton-Stuart, Lord C.
Grenfell, Edward C. (City of London)


Birchall, Major Sir John Dearman
Croft, Brigadier-General Sir H.
Gretton, Colonel Rt. Hon. John


Bird, Ernest Roy
Crookshank, Cpt. H. (Lindsey, Gainsbro)
Gritten, W. G. Howard


Bourne, Captain Robert Croft
Culverwell, C. T. (Bristol, West)
Guinness, Rt. Hon. Walter E.


Bowater, Col, Sir T. Vansittart
Cunliffe-Lister, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip
Gunston, Captain D. W.


Bowyer, Captain Sir George E. W.
Dairymple-White, Lt.-Col. Sir Godfrey
Hamilton, Sir George (Ilford)


Boyce, H. L.
Davidson, Bt. Hon. J. (Hertford)
Hammersley, S. S.


Brass, Captain Sir William
Davies, Dr. Vernon
Hanbury, C.


Briscoe, Richard George
Davies, Maj. Geo. F. (Somerset, Yeovil)
Hannon, Patrick Joseph Henry


Brown, Col. D. C. (N'th'l'd., Hexham)
Duckworth, G. A. V.
Hartington, Marquess of


Brown, Brig.-Gen. H. C. (Berks, Newb'y)
Dugdale, Capt. T. L.
Harvey, Major S. E. (Devon, Totnes)


Buckingham, Sir H.
Edmondson, Major A. J.
Haslam, Henry C.


Burton, Colonel H. W.
Elliot, Major Walter E.
Heneage, Lieut.-Colonel Arthur P.


Butler, R. A.
Erskine, Lord (Somerset, Weston-s.-M.)
Hills, Major Rt. Hon. John Waller


Cadogan, Major Hon. Edward
Everard, W. Lindsay
Hope, Sir Harry (Forfar)


Cattle Stewart, Earl of
Falle, Sir Bertram G.
Howard-Bury, Colonel C. K.


Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hackney, N.)
Nicholson, Col. Rt. Hn. W. G. (Ptrsf'ld)
Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)


Hurd, Percy A.
Nield, Rt. Hon. Sir Herbert
Southby, Commander A. R. J.


James, Lieut.-Colonel Hon. Cuthbert
Ormsby-Gore, Rt. Hon. William
Spender-Clay, Colonel H.


Kindersley, Major G. M.
Peake, Capt. Osbert
Stanley, Maj. Hon. O. (W'morland)


King, Commodore Rt. Hon. Henry D.
Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings)
Steel-Maitland, Rt. Hon. Sir Arthur


Knox, Sir Alfred
Peto, Sir Basil E. (Devon, Barnstaple)
Sueter, Rear-Admiral M. F.


Lamb, Sir J. Q.
Power, Sir John Cecil
Thomson, Sir F.


Lane Fox, Col. Rt. Hon. George R.
Pownall, Sir Assheton
Titchfield, Major the Marquess of


Law, Sir Alfred (Derby, High Peak)
Purbrick, R.
Todd, Capt. A. J.


Leigh, Sir John (Clapham)
Ramsbotham, H.
Train, J.


Leighton, Major B. E. P.
Reid, David D. (County Down)
Tryon, Rt. Hon. George Clement


Lewis, Oswald (Colchester)
Richardson, Sir P. W. (Sur'y, Ch'te'y)
Turton, Robert Hugh


Llewellin, Major J. J.
Roberts, Sir Samuel (Ecclesall)
Ward, Lieut.-Col. Sir A. Lambert


Locker Lampson, Rt. Hon. Godfrey
Rodd, Rt. Hon. Sir James Rennell
Wardlaw-Milne, J. S.


Long, Major Eric
Ross, Major Ronald D.
Warrender, Sir Victor


Lymington, Viscount
Ruggles-Brise, Lieut.-Colonel E. A.
Waterhouse, Captain Charles


McConnell, Sir Joseph
Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)
Wells, Sydney R.


Macquisten, F. A.
Salmon, Major I.
Williams, Com, C. (Devon, Torquay)


Mac Robert, Rt. Hon. Alexander M.
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)
Wilson, G. H. A. (Cambridge U.)


Maitland, A. (Kent, Faversham)
Sandeman, Sir N. Stewart
Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George


Makins, Brigadier-General E.
Sassoon, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip A. G. D.
Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl


Margesson, Captain H. D.
Savery, S. S.
Wolmer, Rt. Hon. Viscount


Meller, R. J.
Simms, Major-General J.
Womersley, W. J.


Merriman, Sir F. Boyd
Sinclair, Col. T. (Queen's U., Belfst)
Wood, Rt. Hon. Sir Kingsley


Mitchell, Sir W. Lane (Streatham)
Skelton, A. N.
Worthington-Evans. Rt. Hon. Sir L.


Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. Sir B.
Smith, Louis W. (Sheffield, Hallam)
Young, Rt. Hon. Sir Hilton


Morrison, W. S. (Glos., Cirencester)
Smith, R. W. (Aberd'n & Kinc'dine, C.)



Morrison-Bell, Sir Arthur Clive
Smith-Carington, Neville W.
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Muirhead, A. J.
Smithers, Waldron
Major Sir George Hennessy and Sir


Newton, Sir D. G. C. (Cambridge)
Somerset, Thomas
George Penny.


NOES.


Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife. West)
Cove, William G.
Henderson, W. W. (Middx., Enfield)


Adamson, W. M. (Staff., Cannock)
Dagger, George
Herriotts, J.


Addison, Rt. Hon. Dr. Christopher
Dallas, George
Hirst, G. H. (York W. R. Wentworth)


Aitchison, Rt. Hon. Craigie M.
Dalton, Hugh
Hoffman, P. C.


Alexander, Rt. Hon. A. V. (Hillsbro')
Davies, E. C. (Montgomery)
Hollins, A.


Alpass, J. H.
Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)
Hopkin, Daniel


Ammon, Charles George
Day, Harry
Hore-Belisha, Leslie


Angell, Norman
Denman, Hon. R. D.
Hudson, James H. (Huddersfield)


Arnott, John
Dudgeon, Major C. R.
Hunter, Dr. Joseph


Aske, Sir Robert
Dukes, C.
Hutchison, Maj.-Gen. Sir R.


Attlee, Clement Richard
Duncan, Charles
Isaacs, George


Ayles, Walter
Ede, James Chuter
John, William (Rhondda, West)


Baker, John (Wolverhampton, Bilston)
Edmunds, J. E.
Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)


Baldwin, Oliver (Dudley)
Edwards, C. (Monmouth, Bedwellty)
Jones, J. J. (West Ham, Silvertown)


Barnes, Alfred John
Edwards, E. (Morpeth)
Jones, Rt. Hon. Leif (Camborne)


Beckett, John (Camberwell, Peckham)
Egan, W. H.
Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)


Bellamy, Albert
Eimley, Viscount
Jowett, Rt. Hon. F. W.


Benn, Rt. Hon. Wedgwood
Evans, Capt. Ernest (Welsh Univer.)
Jowitt, Rt. Hon. Sir W. A.


Bennett, Captain E. N. (Cardiff, Central)
Foot, Isaac
Kelly, W. T.


Bennett, William (Battersea, South)
Freeman, Peter
Kennedy, Thomas


Benson, G.
Gardner, B. W. (West Ham, Upton)
Kenworthy, Lt.-Com. Hon. Joseph M.


Bentham, Dr. Ethel
George, Rt. Hon. D. Lloyd (Car'vn)
Kinley, J.


Bevan, Aneurin (Ebbw Vale)
George, Major G. Lloyd (Pembroke)
Kirkwood, D.


Blindell, James
Gibson, H. M. (Lancs. Mossley)
Knight, Holford


Bondfield, Rt. Hon. Margaret
Gill, T. H.
Lambert, Rt. Hon. George (S. Molton)


Bowen, J. W.
Gillett, George M.
Lang, Gordon


Bowerman, Rt. Hon. Charles W.
Glassey, A. E.
Lansbury, Rt. Hon. George


Broad, Francis Alfred
Gossling, A. G.
Lathan, G.


Brockway, A. Fenner
Gould, F.
Law, Albert (Bolton)


Bromfield, William
Graham, D. M. (Lanark, Hamilton)
Law, A. (Rossendale)


Bromley, J.
Graham, Rt. Hon. Wm. (Edin., Cent.)
Lawrence, Susan


Brooke, W.
Granville, E.
Lawrie, Hugh Hartley (Stalybridge)


Brothers, M.
Gray, Milner
Lawson, John James


Brown, C. W. E. (Notts. Mansfield)
Greenwood, Rt. Hon. A. (Colne).
Lawther, W. (Barnard Castle)


Brown, Ernest (Leith)
Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)
Leach, W.


Brown, James (Ayr and Bute)
Griffith, F. Kingsley (Middlesbro' W.)
Lee, Frank (Derby, N. E.)


Burgess, F. G.
Griffiths, T. (Monmouth, Pontypool)
Lee, Jennie (Lanark, Northern)


Buxton, C. R. (Yorks. W. R. Elland)
Groves, Thomas E.
Lees, J.


Buxton, Rt. Hon. Noel (Norfolk, N.)
Grundy, Thomas W.
Lewis, T. (Southampton)


Calne, Derwent Hall-
Hall, F. (York, W. R., Normanton)
Lloyd, C. Ellis


Cameron, A. G.
Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)
Logan, David Gilbert


Cape, Thomas
Hall, Capt. W. P. (Portsmouth, C.)
Longbottom, A. W.


Carter, W. (St. Pancras, S. W.)
Hamilton, Mary Agnes (Blackburn)
Longden, F.


Charleton, H. C.
Hamilton, Sir R. (Orkney & Zetland)
Lowth, Thomas


Chater, Daniel
Hardie, George D.
Lunn, William


Church, Major A. G.
Harris, Percy A.
Macdonald, Gordon (Ince)


Clarke, J. S.
Hartshorn, Rt. Hon. Vernon
MacDonald, Rt. Hon. J. R. (Seaham)


Cluse, W. S.
Hastings, Dr. Somerville
McEntee, V. L.


Clynes, Rt. Hon. John R.
Haycock, A. W.
McKinlay, A.


Cocks, Frederick Seymonr
Hayday, Arthur
MacLaren, Andrew


Compton, Joseph
Henderson, Right Hon. A. (Burnley)
Maclean, Sir Donald (Cornwall, N.)




MacNeill-Weir, L.
Picton-Turbervill, Edith
Sorensen, R.


McShane, John James
Potts, John S.
Stamford, Thomas W.


Malone, C. L'Estrange (N'thampton)
Quibell, D. J. K.
Stephen, Campbell


Mander, Geoffrey le M.
Ramsay, T. B. Wilson
Stewart, J. (St. Rollox)


Mansfield, W.
Raynes, W. R.
Strauss, G. R.


March, S.
Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)
Sullivan, J.


Marcus, M.
Riley, Ben (Dewsbury)
Sutton, J. E.


Markham, S. F.
Riley, F. F. (Stockton-on-Tees)
Taylor, R. A. (Lincoln)


Marley, J.
Roberts, Rt. Hon. F. O. (W. Bromwich)
Taylor, W. B. (Norfolk, S. W.)


Marshall, Fred
Romeril, H. G.
Thomas, Rt. Hon. J. H. (Derby)


Mathers, George
Rosbotham, D. S. T.
Thurtle, Ernest


Matters, L. W.
Rothschild, J. de
Tinker, John Joseph


Maxton, James
Rowson, Guy
Tout, W. J.


Melville, Sir James
Runciman, Rt. Hon. Walter
Townend, A. E.


Messer, Fred
Russell, Richard John (Eddisbury)
Trevelyan, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles


Millar, J. D.
Salter, Dr. Alfred
Turner, B.


Milner, J.
Samuel, Rt. Hon. Sir H. (Darwen)
Vaughan, D. J.


Montague, Frederick
Samuel, H. W. (Swansea, West)
Viant, S. P.


Morgan, Dr. H. B.
Sanders, W. S.
Walker, J.


Morley, Ralph
Sandham, E.
Wallace, H. W.


Morris, Rhys Hopkins
Sawyer, G. F.
Wallhead, Richard C.


Morrison, Herbert (Hackney, South)
Scott, James
Watkins, F. C.


Morrison, Robert C. (Tottenham, N.)
Shakespeare, Geoffrey H.
Watson, W. M. (Dunfermline)


Mort, D. L.
Shaw, Rt. Hon. Thomas (Preston)
Wellock, Wilfred


Moses, J. J. H.
Shepherd, Arthur Lewis
Welsh, James (Paisley)


Mosley, Lady C. (Stoke-on-Trent)
Sherwood, G. H.
Welsh, James C. (Coatbridge)


Mosley, Sir Oswald (Smothwick)
Shield, George William
West, F. R.


Muff, G.
Shiels, Dr. Drummond
Westwood, Joseph


Muggeridge, H. T.
Shillaker, J. F.
Wheatley, Rt. Hon. J.


Nathan, Major H. L.
Shinwell, E.
Whiteley, Wilfrid (Birm., Ladywood)


Naylor, T. E.
Short, Alfred (Wednesbury)
Whiteley, William (Blaydon)


Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter)
Simmons, C. J.
Wilkinson, Ellen C.


Noel Baker, P. J.
Sinclair, Sir A. (Caithness)
Williams, David (Swansea, East)


Oliver, George Harold (Ilkeston)
Sinkinson, George
Williams, Dr. J. H. (Llanelly)


Oliver, P. M. (Man., Blackley)
Smith, Alfred (Sunderland)
Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)


Owen, Major G. (Carnarvon)
Smith, Ben (Bermondsey, Rotherhithe)
Wilson, J. (Oldham)


Palin, John Henry
Smith, Frank (Nuneaton)
Wilson, R. J. (Jarrow)


Paling, Wilfrid
Smith, H. B. Lees (Keighley)
Winterton, G. E. (Leicester, Loughb'gh)


Palmer, E. T.
Smith, Rennle (Penistone)
Wise, E. F.


Parkinson, John Allen (Wigan)
Smith, Tom (Pontefract)
Wood, Major McKenzie (Banff)


Perry, S. F.
Smith, W. R. (Norwich)
Wright, W. (Rutherglen)


Peters, Dr. Sidney John
Snell, Harry
Young, R. S. (Islington, North)


Pethick-Lawrence, F. W.
Snowden, Rt. Hon. Philip



Phillips, Dr. Marlon
Snowden, Thomas (Accrington)
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—




Mr. Hayes and Mr. T. Henderson.

The CHAIRMAN: The next Amendment which I call is that in the name of the hon. and learned Member for Montgomery (Mr. Clement Davies)—in line 8, after the word "any," to insert the words "interest, or shares, or."

Sir P. CUNLIFFE-LISTER: I have handed in a manuscript Amendment at the end of line 5.

The CHAIRMAN: It is becoming a habit to hand in manuscript Amendments in this way when there has been a large amount of time in which to put Amendments on the Paper. I have to make a selection, and it is unfair to those who have put their Amendments on the Paper that Amendments should be handed in in this way. If the right hon. Gentleman had no other opportunity of getting this on the Paper, I should perhaps have selected it, but I have not selected it on this occasion.

Sir P. CUNLIFFE-LISTER: This raises a very important point of Order. I have done my best to give very ample
notice of all the Amendments that stand in my name on the Paper. This Amendment was not put down, in order to declare the type of man who should be appointed, because I had put down an Amendment, which I thought was a very reasonable one, asking the Government to consent to the names of the commissioners being embodied in an Order to be laid before the House. I did not wish to put unnecessary Amendments on the Paper. If the right hon. Gentleman had accepted the Amendment that these commissioners should be included in an Order to be laid before the House, I certainly should not have dreamt of moving an Amendment prescribing from what classes these gentlemen should be taken, and I submit, therefore, that I was perfectly reasonable in only putting my one Amendment on the Paper and, because I have not been met on that, I submit that I ought to have an opportunity now of moving an Amendment which, as the House is not to have the opportunity of knowing who these commissioners are to be, shall lay down how they are to be
appointed. Indeed, the President of the Board of Trade himself, in opening these Clauses, characterised the type of man who should be taken. My Amendment is only putting in terms what was in his speech. The Amendment is important and, in the circumstances, I submit that it was not unreasonable that I should not have put it on the Paper.

The CHAIRMAN: I think the right ton. Gentleman, having such wide experience of the House as he has, should not have assumed that the previous Amendment would have been accepted by the Government and, therefore, he should have protected himself and left me an opportunity, when I was deciding which Amendment to select, to do it then. I am pointing out that the habit is growing of putting in Amendments at the last moment, and it lies under Standing Order 27A with the Chairman to decide which Amendments to select. There is no more right for a Member to protest against the Chairman not selecting his Amendment when not on the Paper than there is a right to protest against any Amendment when the Amendment is on the Paper. The rule gives the Chairman the power to select Amendments. This Amendment will have an opportunity of being selected at a later stage if the right hon. Gentleman puts it on the Paper, and I do not see that I am doing him any injustice.

Sir P. CUNLIFFE-LISTER: If I understand that if the Amendment is put down on the Report there will be an opportunity of discussing it—

The CHAIRMAN: That does not lie with me. I am carrying out the powers vested in me by the Standing Orders. No point of Order arises.

Mr. CLEMENT DAVIES: I beg to move, as an Amendment to the proposed Clause, in line 8, after the word "any," to insert the words "interest, or shares, or."
The purpose of the Clause is to make the commissioners as free from bias and as independent as possible, and my purpose in this Amendment is to make the Clause even stronger, because as it at present stands it merely deals with one matter, namely, securities in a company which may be possessed by a commis-
sioner. The word "securities" is a very technical one and, further, a mine or a business of selling coal or manufacturing by-products for sale might be the possession of a single individual. As the Clause as present stands, the only person who would have to get rid of his securities would be a commissioner who happened to have securities in a company. This, with a consequential Amendment, is intended to cover not merely securities but shares in a company or any interest in an undertaking that might be in the possession of an individual. Further on, I am proposing to leave out the word "company" and to insert the word "undertaking." When we come to the right hon. Gentleman's third Clause, the commissioners are to amalgamate not companies but undertakings, and it would be only right that they should not have any interest in any undertaking, whether for selling or producing coal, and that they should get rid of their shares or interest within three months, just as the right hon. Gentleman proposes that they should get rid of their securities in the same period.

Mr. TURNER: The Amendment certainly makes for clarity, and we accept it.

Sir BOYD MERRIMAN: Before the hon. Gentleman accepts it, I should like to suggest that in one respect the words are too wide. Everyone sympathises with the object the hon. Member has in moving these words, that there shall be a sufficient parting with control of any share in a coal mining company or undertaking, but by using the word "interest" he has really gone a little too far. Let me give an illustration. Supposing you have a partnership business for the sale of plant connected with coal mining, and the proposed commissioner happens to be a relative of the man who is carrying on that business. The partner dies leaving the business to be carried on for the benefit of his widow and a large family, with an ultimate trust in favour of this brother, in which there is not the faintest chance in practical politics of his really ever having a share. Yet that would clearly be an interest in that business, and, at considerable inconvenience to everybody concerned, he would have to get rid of, or sell, that interest. I would suggest that a form of words a little less drastic might be obtained. Similarly, I would suggest that the words in the consequential Amendment a little lower on the
Paper "or dispose of," so far from strengthening, may tend to weaken the desire that these shares should be got rid of. You can dispose of a thing by making a declaration of trust, and it would not, in my opinion, strengthen the intention of the Amendment to add the words "or dispose of." You cannot have anything very much stronger than the word "sell," and I would suggest that it would effect the purpose if the words "or dispose of" were kept out.

Lieut.-Colonel Sir A. LAMBERT WARD: I cannot help commenting on the fact that neither of the Law Officers of the Crown has thought fit to be present on the Treasury Bench to advise the Committee with regard to the legal position on this Amendment. It is a well-known fact that instead of strengthening a Clause you can weaken it by inserting too many words. I would particularly like to be advised on this matter, because, after all, the Government have accepted this Amendment very glibly, and it is the duty of the Opposition to criticise their action even though they may have accepted an Amendment which has been put down by an hon. Member below the Gangway. I should like to know whether the Law Officers of the Crown consider that this Amendment makes the position clear. It seems to me that the word "securities" is sufficient, and that it would cover everything if you inserted the words "or shares." It might be possible under that wording for a person to retain possession in his own right of an undertaking which was not a company, but his own personal property. Furthermore, the proposal seems to complicate the position in which he would find himself were he a trustee. The Clause says quite definitely that he shall
sell any securities which he may hold in his own name or in the name of a nominee for his own benefit.
The fact remains, that although he might be holding this interest in trust for the benefit of someone else, the money might, and very likely would, be paid into the bank to an account in his own name, for the simple reason that the banks to-day have a distinct objection to having accounts in the names of trustees. They always wish to have them in the name of a particular individual. In that case it would rather complicate matters, for although a person might be holding these interests for the benefit of a trust or some
other party, the moneys or dividends accruing therefrom might be paid into his own account. As the Amendment which has been moved by the hon. and learned Gentleman below the Gangway has been accepted, I imagine that further Amendments on similar lines may also be accepted. Therefore, I think it is a most regrettable thing that we have no expert legal advice as to what actually will be the effect of this Amendment. We have no opinion of the Law Officers of the Crown as to whether the Clause is actually strengthened thereby or whether it is, in a legal sense, even weaker.

Mr. C. DAVIES: If I may intervene in reply to the hon. and learned Gentleman the Member for Rusholme (Sir B. Merriman), in the absence of the Attorney-General, the object of the Clause, without a doubt, is to make the Commission sacrosanct, so that they shall be above suspicion and shall not hold any property in connection with any coal mine which will engender in the minds of suspicious people a feeling that they may have a bias. I chose the best word I could devise, namely, "interest," by which I mean, of course, legal interest and even a fiduciary interest, and not merely a relationship. Of course, the interest will be an interest which is legally centred in the person who is asked to get rid of it within three months of his being appointed a commissioner. With regard to the words "or dispose of it," I thought that it was only fair that the Commission should be entitled to dispose of property rather than actually to sell it. I assume the case where a person has some interest or actually some shares. At present he would have to go through a fictitious sale and pretend that it was a sale, it may be, to his son or somebody else who was carrying on. With the introduction of the words "or dispose of" he need not go through any fictitious sale, but he could dispose of his interest and be able to act as a commissioner free from suspicion.

Sir B. MERRIMAN: I have not succeeded in making my points clear to the hon. and learned Member and it may have been my fault. I and he want to achieve the same object. The point I was making was not concerned with relationship at all. I was assuming that in the case supposed the man had a reversion-
ary interest however remote. I gave an illustration in which a brother or relative had in the case of the ordinary will an ultimate trust in favour of brothers and sisters, though, as a matter of legality, there would be no practical possibility of his actually sharing. There is no real chance of his sharing. I put that as an illustration, and that clearly would be an interest. The point I was trying to make was that if you made the words as wide as was proposed, you would cause a great deal of inconvenience to those who were really interested in the business and would achieve no useful purpose at all. I should have thought that it would be quite sufficient to apply the provisions where the share or shares were the man's own shares in a business or company in which he was really interested. That is the point which I was making.

Mr. SMITHERS: May I ask for your guidance, Mr. Young, owing to my enforced absence from this Committee for a few minutes. How many Amendments are we taking? I want to know how much ground is being covered?

The CHAIRMAN: That depends on the decision of the Committee.

Mr. SMITHERS: I did not know whether you had agreed that a general discussion should take place on the second and subsequent Amendments.

Mr. CHAIRMAN: We have had another Amendment since the hon. Member was here last. These Amendments are consequential.

Mr. SMITHERS: The Clause says that a commissioner shall within three months after his appointment sell any securities which he may hold. I assume that the five commissioners who may be appointed will probably be men of great standing. They may be trustees or have a reversionary interest in all sorts of concerns connected with coal mining, and that is the reason why I asked how far the discussion on this Amendment was to be allowed to proceed. It seems to me that to put in the word "interest" is to give too wide a scope. It may prevent a person from holding a position as commissioner, because it is quite possible that owing to the depressed state of the coal industry—and I think it will be more
depressed because of the provisions of this Measure—he may have an interest which is a minus quantity and which, in consequence, he will be unable to sell. There might be a man whom the President might approach and ask to be a commissioner, who would say, "I own an interest in a certain undertaking." Is the word "undertaking" restricted to coal mines? A man may be interested in a subsidiary concern associated with a coal mine or a partnership in a coal mine. He may be a shareholder or a debenture holder in a gas company or an electricity company, or a china clay company or in anything which might—[Interruption.] I am raising this matter in all seriousness, because it happens to be part of the business in which I am engaged. I can understand a commissioner, in all good faith, accepting an invitation of the President of the Board of Trade, and later on being found to be a shareholder in, say, a co-operative society.
6.0 p.m.
The hon. and learned Member who moved this Amendment from the Liberal benches desired to make these commissioners sacrosanct, and he has almost put them in an impossible position. Supposing a commissioner is invited to take part in this Commission and must sell his interest or shares within three months, it seems to me it would be a very hard condition to place upon a man whose whole capital might have been invested in coal mines perhaps for generations. You would suddenly say that because you wanted this man to help in the reorganisation of the coal mining industry he must within three months, when the coal industry is depressed, be compelled to sell his interest or shares in a particular company. I feel sure that if the President of the Board of Trade sees my point he will take steps to put the matter right on the Report stage. We want the public to have complete confidence in this Commission. We want the Commission to be above suspicion. I would suggest to the President of the Board of Trade that it would meet the position if he could put in some words so as to make the Clause apply to any interest, share or security which a commissioner may hold and which gives him voting rights and the power to give some definite orders which absolutely control or influence the immediate policy of a company in which he may be interested.
To ask a commissioner within three months to sacrifice what may have been in the family, in his company or in his organisation for a lifetime seems to me to be utterly unreasonable. I think that the Amendment which has been placed upon the Paper to include the word "undertaking" would make the Clause rather too wide. I think that the matter should be reconsidered and, if possible, the provision made a little narrower. I take it that the men you will invite to be commissioners will be men beyond all reproach, and they should not be penalised by being compulsorily made to part with their reversionary interests in three months.

Mr. HOLFORD KNIGHT: It is suggested that the word "securities" does not cover all the interests which might be required to be covered. At the same time the proposal to insert the word "interest" is also too wide, because interests may be remote or near, but at the same time it would be a hardship on a commissioner if, on inquiry, it was discovered that he had some remote relationship which was regarded as an interest. I therefore suggest to my right hon. Friend that, if he added the word "fiduciary," before the word "interest," so as to cover an immediate, personal, financial interest, that would secure all that is desired.

Commodore KING: I should like to ask whether, in this conflict of legal opinion, we are not to be favoured with some guidance from a Law Officer of the Crown. The late Solicitor-General has expressed his view, which is dissented from by another hon. and learned Gentleman from below the Gangway here, and now we have had an intimation from another hon. and learned Gentleman opposite who seemed to disagree with both.

Mr. KNIGHT: On the contrary, I agree with both.

Commodore KING: The hon. and learned Member did not seem entirely to agree with the meaning of the word, but when we have a conflict of opinion on legal matters, I think the Committee is entitled to a certain amount of guidance from a Law Officer of the Crown. On matters of detail in a Bill, there is no learned Gentleman in the House who can
put the case more clearly to us than the President of the Board of Trade himself, and on matters of detailed explanation we should never wish for any clearer exposition than he always gives us, but on legal matters it is the custom to have some opinion from a Law Officer of the Crown. We have asked for that on one occasion already on this Bill, when the Attorney-General was actually sitting on the Treasury Bench, and I have always understood that the duty of the Attorney-General is to advise the House of Commons. It is only part of his duty, as a Law Officer of the Crown, to give advice to the Government itself; he also has the wider duty, when it is required, of giving legal advice to the House of Commons. I therefore ask that we should have some guidance from a Law Officer of the Crown before we come to a decision on this Amendment.

Mr. J. JONES: When lawyers fall out, generally speaking, ordinary citizens come by their own, and whether they are on our side or the other side, we, usually discover that they always fall out about words and never about principles. We all agree that there is something that should be done, and we are asking that something may be done. Commissioners are going to be appointed, and they should be free from any personal interest. They should have no connection with the industry from a financial standpoint. I am not likely to be a commissioner. [HON. MEMBERS: "Why not?"] Why should I not? All that I know about coal is that I have to pay for it, and I know a place where we are paying for rubbish £2 8s. a ton.

Mr. SMITHERS: You will pay more after this.

Mr. JONES: That is the lowest price for which we can get it.

The DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN (Mr. Dunnico): We cannot discuss the price of coal on this Amendment.

Mr. JONES: But the commissioners, when they start to operate, will have a very large power in connection with the price of coal and the general control of the mining industry, and therefore, though I am averse to them in a personal way, I have no objection to them. The commissioners should receive a certain remuneration, but they must not be directly
connected with the industry, and under present day conditions it seems almost impossible to segregate an individual from his industrial investments. He may be a commissioner for coal, but he may also be a director of a railway company that uses coal to an enormous extent, or he may be a director of a bank which finances a coal company. Nobody can tell where these interests begin and where they end. Is it not far better to say that these commissioners shall be appointed, and that they shall have no connection with any financial or industrial interest which is connected with the coal industry? Then we will hand it on to our cousins, sisters, and aunts, because we have the right of disposal.
What a marvellous system it is! I am a member of a public body where we have a regulation that members cannot themselves be directly connected with contracts given out by the local authority, but immediately we stop them by resolution of our council, we find there is a public company formed, and we cannot touch them. They can have all their relations as shareholders, but the other members of the council are not in it. Is that playing the game? So far as we are concerned, we say that, if you are going to have commissioners, you should have them free, you should pay them a decent salary for their work, and you should tell them that they must cut themselves adrift from all connection with these national concerns.
Why should the workers make all the sacrifices? The miners will be called upon to make some sacrifices—they have already been called upon to do so—and why should we not ask these clever people, who know all about it, to make a sacrifice in order to help the men and women whose lives depend on the industry, for the good of the nation? They are always patriotic, but they are always looking to the main chance. Patriots, yes, when it pays—five per cent. patriots, and that is a minimum. Are we not entitled to say that if this Bill goes through, we are asking them to work the coal mines of this country in the interests of the country, which is a patriotic duty? During the War, they were all prepared to lay down their lives upon the altar of their country, but all that they did was to lay down other people's lives on the
altar of their country. When the War was over they wanted to make more profit than they had ever made before, and now they are grumbling because they are in a bad way. They have had complete control of this industry for "donkeys' years."

The DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN: We are now discussing certain commissioners to be appointed, not the action of past owners.

Mr. JONES: I hope you will not appoint the same commissioners as were appointed in West Ham. We do not want superannuated ex-officials of the State, who were paid more for doing a job in West Ham that they were incapable of doing than they could get at their own job. All that we ask is, if you have commissioners, that you should have right commissioners, and I do not care what you pay them, so long as you get the right men. If this industry is in a parlous condition, as those who know more about it than I do have told us it is, we want the best men we can get, and we want to pay them the beet price we can to keep them free from all private and subsidiary interests.

Mr. W. GRAHAM: I cannot claim to be in any way an authority on the legal aspects of this problem, but I think I can put the position of the Government quite simply and clearly, so far at least as the points which have been raised are concerned. As hon. Members have pointed out, the whole object was to secure the appointment of commissioners who would have no direct or immediate interest in this industry, in order that they should bring quite impartial minds to the amalgamations and to all the other problems connected with these schemes. Accordingly, the Committee will observe that in the long Clause on the paper there is a certain amount of specification as to the interests or securities which must be disposed of before they become eligible for this work. That specification turns on an interest in companies which are raising coal or in companies which are associated with the by-products of coal, and they go beyond that into undertakings which are related to plant or machinery connected with coal mining in this country.
On the whole, that is a pretty reasonable and fair specification. There are certain hon. Members who have suggested that to specify machinery or plant connected with coal mining is to go perhaps
a little too far, but I suggest to the Committee that it is best, in a matter of this kind, and in view of the very large interests involved, that we should put the problem beyond all doubt, and that the specification contained in the long Clause is, in the circumstances, reasonable and fair. That has not been attacked, and I think that is a substantial reply to the point put by my hon. Friend the Member for Chislehurst (Mr. Smithers), who asked as to the kind of disqualification in industrial ownership that would be imposed. It is limited by the specification in the long Clause, and it will never apply to any undertaking or rights in an undertaking which simply happened to use coal, because then you would have to bar out almost every individual in the State. That is not intended for a moment, and I suggest that the specification is perfectly clear on that point.
Now I come to the second point, which was raised by the hon. and learned Gentleman the ex-Solicitor-General, as to whether the adding of these words on the Paper, "interest, or shares, or," over and above the term "securities," is really too wide, and on that point I am frank to confess that I am impressed by the argument that "interest" may cover a reversionary interest which may be very remote, that it would rule out the whole of such a very remote reversionary interest, and impose perhaps considerable disturbance, which, on the facts of the situation, is quite unnecessary, and that that is not something which any section of the Committee desires to do, and might in practice very severely restrict our choice of capable commissioners. Accordingly, I think I have said enough on the two points of explanation to enable me to make this proposal, that as regards this term "interest," if there is any difficulty regarding a reversionary interest, I am willing to find appropriate words, in consultation with Members before the Report stage, in order to remove a difficulty of that kind. On that undertaking, I think we might very well pass this Clause.

Mr. SMITHERS: I should like to thank the President of the Board of Trade for his reply. He confessed that he is not a legal authority, and I am desirous that the choice of commissioners shall not be restricted in any way. I should like to ask the learned Attorney-
General whether the words "manufacture or sale of by-products of coal" would restrict the choice. The by-products of coal are very numerous, and I want to be quite clear that the new Clause is restricted to the actual coal, the working of the coal mine and the making of plant and machinery; and that it does not go any further.

Sir A. LAMBERT WARD: Where do we stand now? The Government have accepted this Amendment to their Amendment and they now say that they will reconsider the whole matter on Report. Is the Amendment to the new Clause going to be inserted or not; or are we to wait until the Report stage?

Mr. W. GRAHAM: The point is perfectly plain. I have undertaken to accept the word "interest" in the proposed Amendment, but, if there is any prejudice, I have undertaken to find a remedy before the Report stage.

Sir NAIRNE STEWART SANDEMAN: In the event of one of the proposed commissioners holding an interest in coal mines in America or India, or anywhere else, would he have to sell his interest or not?

Mr. W. GRAHAM: Off-hand, I must not pronounce finally; but I am glad to think that in this case I am legislating only for Great Britain.

Amendment to proposed Clause, agreed to.

Mr. C. DAVIES: I beg to move, as an Amendment to the proposed Clause, in line 10, to leave out the word "company," and to insert instead thereof the word "undertaking."

Mr. SMITHERS: The word "undertaking" has a much wider meaning than the word "company," and I should like the President of the Board of Trade to consider this point. I think the word "undertaking" creates the same difficulty as the word "interest."

Mr. W. GRAHAM: Yes, but if there is the slightest doubt about it we shall have to remove it on Report stage.

Amendment to proposed Clause agreed to.

Consequential Amendments made to proposed Clause.

Mr. ERNEST BROWN: I beg to move, as an Amendment to the proposed Clause, in line 15, after the word "sell," to insert the words "or dispose of it or."

Sir A. LAMBERT WARD: May I ask for the guidance of the learned Attorney-General as to whether this Amendment will open any back-door means for the disposal of shares other than by selling them; that is, retaining them under a different name or in any other way retaining practically possession of these shares although to all intents and purposes they have been disposed of.

Commodore KING: During the discussion on this new Clause I asked that we might have the advice of the Attorney-General and the President of the Board of Trade acceded, as he usually does, to a seasonable request of that kind, but he was able to give the reply himself. The reason I asked for the guidance of the Attorney-General was because there was a difference of opinion. The hon. and learned Member for Nottingham South (Mr. Knight) tried to clear up the point and said something about a fiduciary interest. I do not think he meant to use that word at all.

Mr. KNIGHT: I did not use it in that connection at all.

Commodore KING: I should like to know whether this Amendment does give wider powers than is intended?

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL (Sir William Jowitt): In my view it will not give wider powers. It is desirable to have these words, and I do not think they will open the door in any way in which we want to close it. At the same time, the Amendment will receive further consideration in the same way as the other questions.

Amendment to proposed Clause agreed to.

Mr. W. GRAHAM: I beg to move, as an Amendment to the proposed Clause, in line 23, at the beginning, to insert the words:
For the purposes of any business for which a quorum of the commissioners is required by this Act to be present, three commissioners personally present shall be a quorum, but, save as aforesaid.
On a previous occasion several hon. Members raised the question as to the manner in which the commissioners would
act. The Amendment provides that for the purposes of business the quorum shall be three, and the Committee will observe that these words have been incorporated in later Clauses. Hon. Members will have to read them with the inclusion of these words in subsequent Clauses of the Bill. In the case of getting evidence under the Tribunals Evidence Act by compulision, the submission of a scheme or a certificate of valuation, it is provided that a quorum of commissioners, that is three, will be necessary for such purposes. This Amendment has been put down in order to meet the wishes of hon. Members.

Mr. SMITHERS: I should like to ask one question. Can these three commissioners come to a decision on behalf of the commissioners as a whole, or must any decision of the commissioners be unanimous? I have an Amendment later on to insure that every decision on important matters shall be unanimous, and I should like to know whether the quorum of three will have to put their decision before the remaining two members and get their consent before it can be deemed to have been approved by the commissioners?

Mr. GRAHAM: It is perfectly clear that on all proposals there will be consultation among all the members of the Commission, and I hope and indeed believe that on all occasions the commissioners as a whole will be familiar with what is proposed. After all, we must be practical in these matters and the Amendment which I am now moving realises that in these important matters a decision may be taken but it is specified that three members must be a quorum. I suggest that in practical business matters it is the only basis on which we can proceed.

Commodore KING: The difficulty in my mind is with regard to a previous remark of the right hon. Gentleman. He made a reference to the possibility of the commissioners sub-dividing themselves, and he appeared to visualise the commissioners carrying on inquiries in different parts of the country. It seemed that they had power to organise schemes and make recommendations as separate entities. I should like to know whether he has this prospect still in mind. If three is to be a quorum I quite realise that it is not possible for the commissioners to divide themselves up in this way. That is my difficulty; and I want
to make sure that there is no opportunity of the commissioners dividing up their forces in such a way that certain people may come to a certain decision in one part of the country and certain other people come to another decision in another part of the country. This is a matter which should be treated from the same angle throughout the country, and we want to make sure that there is no sub-division on the part of the commissioners, one part coming to a decision in one part of the country and another part to a decision in another part of the country.

Mr. GRAHAM: There is no difficulty in giving the hon. and gallant Member an assurance on that point. When we last discussed the constitution of this Commission and the manner in which it would go about its work I indicated that in order to save time, and in the interests of the efficiency of the investigations they might undertake, that an inquiry in different parts of the country in numbers of three or two, or whatever happened to be the more convenient arrangement, might be undertaken. I have not the slightest doubt that is the manner in which they will work. These commissioners will have a very definite view of the plan they intend to follow but without committing them in any way I think that for the purposes of a district inquiry or the submission of a scheme that this quorum is essential. No scheme can go up unless it is approved by a majority of the commissioners, and therefore the question of the subdivision of the commissioners is not a difficulty which will arise.

Amendment to proposed Clause agreed to.

Mr. SMITHERS: I beg to move, as an Amendment to the proposed Clause, in line 28, to leave out the words "to the commissioners and."
The Clause in its present form reads as follows:
The Board of Trade may appoint a secretary to the Commission and the Commission may employ such officers and servants as the Board may, with the approval of the Treasury determine, and there shall be paid by the Board such remuneration to the commissioners and to the Secretary,
etc. I propose to leave out the words which would include the commissioners in any remuneration. The hon. Member
for Silvertown (Mr. J. Jones) said he did not mind how much we paid these commissioners as long as we got the right men. He said "Pay them a decent wage. I do not care what you pay." Some of us think that the work of this Commission will be as important, especially to this great fundamental industry, as that of any Commission which has ever sat in this country to deal with a domestic subject, and it is my desire in moving this Amendment to enable the President of the Board of Trade to get the very best men available for the job. It is a long established custom in this country, when His Majesty through his Ministers, requires advice and counsel on some important point, to select a Royal Commission and I believe I am right in saying that those commissioners are never paid. I suggest that the right hon. Gentleman will get better men to serve on this Commission if he proceeds on those lines and appoints unpaid commissioners.
I do not know the kind of men whom the right hon. Gentleman has in mind in connection with this Commission, Earlier in these discussions I suggested that the Commission should consist of a leading banker, a leading barrister, a leading accountant, a leading mining engineer and a leading surveyor. Whether that is the right hon. Gentleman's idea or not I do not know, but, from whatever professions he selects the five commissioners, he wants to get the very best men available. I do not think that the Committee yet realises the vast importance of the work which is to be entrusted to this Commission. In sending invitations to prominent men in any of the great professions which I have mentioned, asking them to serve on the Commission at a salary, what sort of salary would the right hon. Gentleman have in mind? What kind of salary would the right hon. Gentleman offer to men of the type that I hope he is going to get? What kind of salary would men of such professional eminence consider? I do not think that the hon. Member for Silvertown, with the best will in the world, would be prepared to vote a salary of £10,000 or £15,000 to a commissioner appointed for this purpose. Therefore I suggest that it would be better to follow the precedent of the Royal Commissions and to appeal to the very best men in the country to give their services freely.
We have never yet failed to find patriotic people of the greatest eminence to act on those Commissions and I suggest that it would be better for the country and for the industry if no payment were offered in connection with this Commission. Let the right hon. Gentle-man go to the very highest men in those professions and say to them, "We want you to serve your country in this very difficult matter." If he does so, I believe he will get tip-top men, and I think that any sum -which the Treasury would allow, or which the right hon. Gentleman feels himself able to offer, will not be appropriate to men of the type that we hope to see on this Commission. I ask the right hon. Gentleman to rely on this case on the patriotic spirit which has always been shown by men of all parties—as the Lord Privy Seal can, I believe, testify from experience. That patriotic spirit has always been shown by the leaders of the great professions and the right hon. Gentleman will do well, as I say, to rely upon it for the carrying out of this highly important task.

Major G. DAVIES: The question raised by the Amendment is: Are these commissioners to be paid or unpaid. It rests with the Committee to decide as to whether we shall get the best men by paying the commissioners or by not paying them. That is the only point at issue. There are, we know, two arguable views on this point which arises very often in connection with local government and other forms of public service. The question is whether by making a position unpaid you do not rule out a great many people, whose financial position makes it impossible for them to give their time, although to rule out their services means a loss to the State. On the other hand due weight must attach to the experience of the past and to the prospect of getting the kind of men we want. One of the boasts of our public life for generations has been the fact that we have a constant supply of men, in all classes of life, who are willing to give their ability and their time to public work. Our experience in the past generally speaking has been that we have been able to get the very best men for all kinds of public service from acting on a Royal Commission to acting on a board of guardians, without any pay.
I cannot help feeling that the balance of argument is on the side of having these commissioners unpaid, though I agree that there are arguments to be advanced on the other side. My reasons for supporting the Amendment are twofold. First, if you get the very best men, they will be men who have proved by their ability and success, their fitness for such an office. A man of that kind will have reached a responsible position, which ordinarily takes up a great deal of his time, and if you are going to try to compensate him by means of any form of remuneration, you will be confronted with the payment of exceedingly high salaries involving great financial burdens on the State. I submit that it is possible to get equally good men without paying anything at all. A second and more serious consideration is that if these positions are remunerated on a very high scale, or a reasonably high scale, the President of the Board of Trade will run the risk of having a great many people seeking these positions whose interest is not so much what they can give to the State, as what they can get from the State. In other words, the payment of a salary will attract a typo of person whom the President of the Board of Trade, in common with myself, would regard as the last kind of person to be entrusted with this enormous responsibility. It is an enormous responsibility, and, as has been said, the Committee and the country little realise what a tremendous responsibility it is in connection with this important industry. The payment of salaries to these commissioners might go far to disappoint the aims and ideals of hon. Members opposite. We cannot afford to make a mistake in this matter and, while giving full weight to the objection that we might rule out Al brains on mere considerations of worldly success or financial considerations, I think, at the same time, the balance of argument is on the other side. We would do well to accept the Amendment and call on that patriotism and that willingness to serve, which has always been shown in connection with great national and State services, by people who are willing to come forward without the attraction of a salary.

Mr. E. BROWN: The Amendment seems to me to be a mixture of idealism and meanness, and I have been reminded during the discussion on it of some lines of Kipling referring to the ideal state:
And none but the Master shall praise us and none but the Master shall blame,
And no one shall work for money, and no one shall work for fame,
But each fur the joy of working, and each in his separate star
Shall draw the thing as he sees it, for the God of things as they are.
Those lines refer to heaven, and I understand that, as far as we know there is no coal in heaven. I do not know what the Amendment is really about. If the idealism part of it stood alone one could respect it, but when we have linked with it the other argument that we require men so good and the salaries which we ought to pay them are so large, that we ought not to pay them anything at all, I think the Committee will remain unconvinced even by the painstaking efforts of the hon. Member for Chislehurst (Mr. Smithers).

Mr. W. GRAHAM: My hon. Friend the Member for Leith (Mr. E. Brown) has remarked that there is no coal in heaven and in the course of these long discussions that is the most encouraging thing that I have heard. The Amendment before us would make it impossible for the Government to provide any remuneration for the commissioners appointed in connection with these amalgamation schemes. I think I can explain the position in a very few words. The Financial Memorandum pointed out that of the total expenditure of £285,000 annually under this Bill, about £250,000 would be attributable to these amalgamation schemes and I added that the great bulk of this £250,000 would be related to the technical charges connected with the preparation of schemes which would be recoverable in due course from the amalgamated concerns—that is in regard to the technical and other advice which it was required to bring in for this purpose. Expenditure in paying the remuneration of the commissioners would not be a charge on the undertakings, but upon the State. I cannot give the slightest indication to-day regarding the remuneration to be offered to the com missioners, but hon. Members will recollect that it has been decided that they need not necessarily be full-time commissioners. The whole object will be to get very able people, who will command universal confidence. We have never disputed that they are to be entrusted with a task of very great
magnitude, affecting practically the whole of the industry and commerce of this country. If we set out to get full- time commissioners' and to pay them a salary which would be reasonable, having regard to the sacrifices that men in that position would have to make, that would be a very large charge upon public funds. Quite frankly, it is not intended to do anything of the kind.
We all know, to our satisfaction, that any Government, irrespective of political parties, can command the services of distinguished people in this country who are willing to do a very great deal for nothing or for a mere honorarium or recognition which, in many cases, will not cover the loss they sustain in other directions. I am satisfied, indeed, I know already that service of that kind will be forthcoming in this connection. If the Amendment were carried I should be debarred from giving any recognition at all, and that is a thing to which even a Scottish mind finds it difficult to respond, I hope that the Amendment will not be pressed, but in any event the Government cannot accept it.

Colonel LANE FOX: The Amendment puts me in a rather difficult position, because I sympathise with the view expressed by the President of the Board of Trade that if you are to have commissioners you are bound to offer them some remuneration, and that it would narrow the choice very much if that was not done. At the same time, objecting as I do to the fact that the commissioners are to be there at all, and disliking the the character of the work that is to be put upon them to do, and believing that considerable mischief will result—I am not entitled to go into that matter now—I do not feel inclined to support any proposal that gives money to a thoroughly unsound scheme. On the other hand, I agree that if we are to have these commissioners, it ought not to be made impossible to pay them anything. The Committee has decided that there are to be commissioners, and the question arises what is to be the position of any honest Member of Parliament who thinks as I do. Am I to vote money for a purpose which I know will be wasteful, merely because the Committee, having made a mistake, and having agreed to appoint commissioners cannot expect to get good work from them unless some salary is paid
to them? When the right hon. Gentleman speaks about big money not being wanted, I do not quite understand his position. I do not know what negotiations he has had or what assurances he may have got, but I think it is extremely unlikely, in view of the work that the commissioners will have to do, that he will find men prepared to give up so much of their time without a very high salary. It is extremely unlikely that we shall find that these commissioners can be appointed unless very considerable salaries are given.
In the White Paper it is suggested that a considerable amount of expenditure, about £250,000, can be got back from the undertakings if amalgamations are carried out through the commissioners. I have not yet been able to discover the amount of interference by the commissioners which would entitle the Government to claim back the expenditure involved. I should think that it is very unlikely that any very large sum will be recovered. Any amalgamation which is going through normally and does not require the services of the commissioners, will pay nothing. A large number of inquiries will prove to be futile, and in a good many cases the action of the commissioners will have the effect of irritating rather than encouraging amalgamations, and amalgamations which might possibly have been pushed through may be checked or stopped by the action of the commissioners. In these cases, large expenditure may be involved in technical experts and no money will be recovered. Therefore, I think the right hon. Gentleman is extraordinarly sanguine when he suggests that the cost will be so small. If we are to have commissioners and if they are to do the work that the right hon. Gentleman thinks is necessary, they will have to be paid well, but I cannot agree to take any part in voting money which I believe will be wasted, and which may lead to mischief.

Captain HUDSON: I and other hon. Members on this side are disappointed with the reply of the right hon. Gentleman. The object of this Amendment, in support of which my name appears, was, to a great extent, to get a statement from the President of the Board of Trade as to what sort of men he expected to get for his commissioners,
and how he proposed to pay them. We hoped that we might have a fairly full statement as to the type of men that he hoped to get. He has given us very little information. We hoped to find out whether a full-time salary was to be paid and how much was to be paid, but he gave us practically no information. It would probably be better if the commissioners were unpaid, the reason being that the finest type of men can be got on commissions of this kind, which have a great national work to do, and such men are not attracted necessarily by high salaries, but from a sense of duty.
What we want on this Commission, more than anything else, are men of experience and of particular qualifications in regard to the subjects that will have to be dealt with. We want the finest type of men, and I believe that type of men will be attracted if on this Commission, as on many other commissions, they are on an unpaid basis. That suggestion seems to surprise the hon. Member for Leith (Mr. E. Brown). I agree that if you cannot get the type of man that we want on an unpaid basis, then we must pay a price which will secure the best brains, in competition with industrial undertakings. I could not understand what the President of the Board of Trade meant when he said that he proposed to pay the commissioners, but that he did not propose to pay them much. Perhaps he will enlighten us a little further on that point. Either a man is paid what he is worth or he is not paid at all. If it should be decided that the commissioners must be full-time men and must be paid, I hope that the right hon. Gentleman will see that he offers such a salary as will attract men who are capable of taking a most important part in the industries of this country. We must get the very best people either by paying them nothing at all or by paying an adequate salary to attract them.

Mr. REID: I feel myself in somewhat the same position as the right hon. and gallant Member for Barkston Ash (Colonel Lane Fox), although my sympathies are with the President of the Board of Trade. I should like to hear what class of men he proposes to get. I am afraid that he will be in a difficulty. Take the position of an accountant. It is a gross breach of professional honour
for an accountant who is engaged in dealing, for instance, with the affairs of colliery companies or other companies that might come under the control of the commissioners, to make any use of information that he has acquired in that capacity, for the purpose of these amalgamations. That means that if the right hon. Gentleman proposes to appoint men who have been professionally dealing with the trade, he may find himself in a difficulty. For example, if one were a solicitor and had been conversant with the affairs of companies that may come under the purview of the Commission, one could not make use of any of that information for the purpose of this Bill. In these circumstances it seems to me that the men appointed must be men who are not intimately acquainted with and have not had experience of this particular trade. In that case, they will have to learn their job and they will have to be full-time men, and, if they are to be men of sufficient capacity to do their job properly, they will have to be highly paid.

Captain PEAKE: The question is, are the commissioners to be paid or are they not to be paid? That raises one very important matter in regard to the appointment of the commissioners. Whereas the Bill provides for the appointment of the commissioners, there is no machinery to provide for getting rid of the commissioners. Therefore, these jobs are going to be jobs for life. As I understand it,

at the rate Commissions proceed, on the best estimate that I can make it will take about 140 years for the ambition of the right hon. Gentleman for Darwen (Sir H. Samuel) to be achieved. Therefore, it is very important, if we are going to give a salary to the commissioners, that there should be provision either for getting rid of the commissioners when they are past their work or else they should be unpaid commissioners, in which case they will be perfectly willing to resign when they feel that they can no longer carry out their duties.

Mr. W. GRAHAM: I can clear up the points raised in a few words. First of all, the commissioners are to be appointed by the Board of Trade, subject to the conditions imposed at the time of the appointment by the Board. Those conditions may very well, and probably will, provide that in the case of a commissioner becoming, through any reason, disqualified or incapable of discharging his duties, he may be removed from office. There is no difficulty on the other points that have been raised. May I suggest to the Committee that as we have had a very full discussion, we might now come to a decision?

Question put, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the proposed Clause."

The Committee divided: Ayes, 292; Noes, 160.

Division No. 178.]
AYES.
[7.1 p.m.


Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife, West)
Brockway, A. Fenner
Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)


Adamson, W. M. (Staff., Cannock)
Bromfield, William
Day, Harry


Addison, Rt. Hon. Dr. Christopher
Bromley, J.
Denman, Hon. R. D.


Aitchison, Rt. Hon. Craigie M.
Brooke, W.
Dudgeon, Major C. R.


Alpase, J. H.
Brothers, M.
Dukes, C.


Ammon, Charles George
Brown, C. W. E. (Notts, Mansfield)
Duncan, Charles


Angell, Norman
Brown, Ernest (Leith)
Ede, James Chuter


Aske, Sir Robert
Brown, James (Ayr and Bute)
Edmunds, J. E.


Attlee, Clement Richard
Buchanan, G.
Edwards, E. (Morpeth)


Ayles, Walter
Burgess, F. G.
Egan, W. H.


Baker, John (Wolverhampton, Bilston)
Butler, R. A.
Elmley, Viscount


Baldwin, Oliver (Dudley)
Buxton, C. R. (Yorks. W. R. Elland)
Evans, Capt, Ernest (Walsh Univer.)


Balfour, Captain H. H. (I. of Thanet)
Buxton, Rt. Hon. Noel (Norfolk, N.)
Foot, Isaac


Barnes, Alfred John
Calne, Derwent Hall-
Freeman, Peter


Batey, Joseph
Cameron, A. G.
Gardner, B. W. (West Ham, Upton)


Beckett, John (Camberwell, Peckham)
Cape, Thomas
George, Major G. Lloyd (Pembroke)


Bellamy, Albert
Carter, W. (St. Pancras, S. W.)
Gibbins, Joseph


Benn, Rt. Hon. Wedgwood
Charleton, H. C.
Gibson, H. M. (Lanes. Mossley)


Bennett, Captain E. N. (Cardiff, Central)
Chater, Daniel
Gill, T. H.


Bennett, William (Battersea, South)
Church, Major A. G.
Gillett, George M.


Benson, G.
Clarke, J. S.
Glassey, A. E.


Bentham, Dr. Ethel
Cluse, W. S.
Gossling, A. G.


Bevan, Aneurin (Ebbw Vale)
Cocks, Frederick Seymour
Gould, F.


Birkett, W. Norman
Compton, Joseph
Graham, D. M. (Lanark, Hamilton)


Bilndeif, James
Cove, William G.
Graham, Rt. Hon. Wm. (Edin., Cent.)


Bondfield, Rt. Hon. Margaret
Daggar, George
Granville, E.


Bowen, J. W.
Dallas, George
Gray, Milner


Bowerman, Rt. Hon. Charles W.
Dalton, Hugh
Greenwood, Rt. Hon. A. (Colne).


Broad, Francis Alfred
Davies, E. C. (Montgomery)
Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)


Griffith, F. Kingsley (Middlesbro' W.)
McShane, John James
Shakespeare, Geoffrey H.


Griffiths, T. (Monmouth, Pontypool)
Malone, C. L'Estrange (N'thampton)
Shaw, Rt. Hon. Thomas (Preston)


Groves, Thomas E.
Mander, Geoffrey le M.
Shepherd, Arthur Lewis


Grundy, Thomas W.
Mansfield, W.
Sherwood, G. H.


Hall, F. (York, W. R., Normanton)
March, S.
Shield, George William


Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)
Marcus, M.
Shiels, Dr. Drummond


Hall, Capt. W. P. (Portsmouth, C.)
Markham, S. F.
Shillaker, J. F.


Hamilton, Mary Agnes (Blackburn)
Marley, J.
Shinwell, E.


Hamilton, Sir R. (Orkney & Zetland)
Marshall, Fred
Short, Alfred (Wednesbury)


Hardie, George D.
Mathers, George
Simmons, C. J.


Harris, Percy A.
Matters, L. W.
Simon, Rt. Hon. Sir John


Hartshorn, Rt. Hon. Vernon
Maxton, James
Sinclair, Sir A. (Caithness)


Hastings, Dr. Somerville
Melville, Sir James
Sinkinson, George


Haycock, A. W.
Messer, Fred
Smith, Alfred (Sunderland)


Hayday, Arthur
Millar, J. D.
Smith, Ben (Bermondsey, Rotherhithe)


Hayes, John Henry
Milner, J.
Smith, Frank (Nuneaton)


Henderson, Arthur, Junr. (Cardiff, S.)
Montague, Frederick
Smith, H. B. Lees (Keighley)


Henderson, Thomas (Glasgow)
Morgan, Dr. H. B.
Smith, Rennle (Penistone)


Henderson, W. W. (Middx., Enfield)
Morley, Ralph
Smith, Tom (Pontefract)


Herriotts, J.
Morris, Rhys Hopkins
Smith, W. R. (Norwich)


Hirst, G. H. (York W. R. Wentworth)
Morris-Jones, Dr. J. H. (Denbigh)
Snell, Harry


Hoffman, P. C.
Morrison, Herbert (Hackney, South)
Snowden, Rt. Hon Philip


Hollins, A.
Morrison, Robert C. (Tottenham, N.)
Snowden, Thomas (Accrington)


Hopkin, Daniel
Mort, D. L.
Sorensen, R.


Horrabin, J. F.
Moses, J. J. H.
Stamford, Thomas W.


Hudson, James H. (Huddersfield)
Mosley, Lady C. (Stoke-on-Trent)
Stephen, Campbell


Hunter, Dr. Joseph
Mosley, Sir Oswald (Smethwick)
Stewart, J. (St. Rollox)


Hutchison, Maj.-Gen. Sir R.
Muggeridge, H. T.
Strachey, E. J. St. Loe


Isaacs, George
Nathan, Major H. L.
Strauss, G. R.


Jenkins, W. (Glamorgan, Neath)
Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter)
Sullivan, J.


John, William (Rhondda, West)
Noel Baker, P. J.
Sutton, J. E.


Johnston, Thomas
Oldfield, J. R.
Taylor, R. A. (Lincoln)


Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)
Oliver, George Harold (Ilkeston)
Taylor, W. B. (Norfolk, S. W.)


Jones, J. J. (West Ham, Silvertown)
Oliver, P. M. (Man., Blackley)
Thomas, Rt. Hon. J. H. (Derby)


Jones, Rt. Hon. Leif (Camborne)
Owen, Major G. (Carnarvon)
Thurtle, Ernest


Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)
Owen, H. F. (Hereford)
Tinker, John Joseph


Jowett, Rt. Hon. F. W.
Palin, John Henry
Tout, W. J.


Jowitt, Rt. Hon. Sir W. A.
Paling, Wilfrid
Townend, A. E.


Kedward, R. M. (Kent, Ashford)
Palmer, E. T.
Trevelyan, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles


Kelly, W. T.
Parkinson, John Allen (Wigan)
Turner, B.


Kennedy, Thomas
Perry, S. F.
Vaughan, D. J.


Kinley, J.
Pethick-Lawrence, F. W.
Viant, S. P.


Kirkwood, D.
Phillips, Dr. Marlon
Walker, J.


Knight, Holford
Picton-Turbervill, Edith
Wallace, H. W.


Lambert, Rt. Hon. George (S. Molton)
Potts, John S.
Wallhead, Richard C.


Lang, Gordon
Price, M. P.
Watkins, F. C.


Lansbury, Rt. Hon. George
Quibell, D. J. K.
Watson, W. H. (Dunfermline)


Law, Albert (Bolton)
Ramsay, T. B. Wilson
Wellock, Wilfred


Law, A. (Rosendale)
Rathbone, Eleanor
Welsh, James (Paisley)


Lawrence, Susan
Raynes, W. R.
Welsh, James C. (Coatbridge)


Lawrie, Hugh Hartley (Stalybridge)
Richards, R.
West, F. R.


Lawther, W. (Barnard Castle)
Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)
Westwood, Joseph


Leach, W.
Riley, Ben (Dewsbury)
Wheatley, Rt. Hon. J.


Lee, Frank (Derby, N. E.)
Riley, F. F. (Stockton-on-Tees)
Whiteley, Wilfrid (Birm., Ladywood)


Lee, Jennie (Lanark, Northern)
Ritson, J.
Williams, David (Swansea, East)


Lees, J.
Roberts, Rt. Hon. F. O. (W. Bromwich)
Williams, Dr. J. H. (Llanelly)


Lewis, T. (Southampton)
Romeril, H. G.
Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)


Logan, David Gilbert
Rosbotham, D. S. T.
Wilson, C. H. (Sheffield, Attercliffe)


Longbottom, A. W.
Rothschild, J. de
Wilson, J. (Oldham)


Longden, F.
Rowson, Guy
Wilson R. J. (Jarrow)


Lowth, Thomas
Runciman, Rt. Hon. Walter
Winterton, G. E. (Leicester, Loughb'gh)


Lunn, William
Russell, Richard John (Eddisbury)
Wise, E. F.


Macdonald, Gordon (Ince)
Salter, Dr. Alfred
Wood, Major McKenzie (Banff)


MacDonald, Rt. Hon. J. R. (Seaham)
Samuel, Rt. Hon. Sir H. (Darwen)
Wright, W. (Rutherglen)


McElwee, A.
Samuel, H. W. (Swansea, West)
Young, R. S. (Islington, North)


McEntee, V. L.
Sanders, W. S.



McKinlay, A.
Sawyer, G. F
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


MacLaren, Andrew
Scott, James
Mr. Charles Edwards and Mr.


Maclean, Sir Donald (Cornwall, N.)
Scurr, John
Whiteley.


MacNeill-Weir, L.
Sextan, James



NOES.


Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel
Bevan, S. J. (Holborn)
Cadogan, Major Hon. Edward


Albery, Irving James
Birchall, Major Sir John Dearman
Castle Stewart, Earl of


Amery, Rt. Hon. Leopold C. M. S.
Bird, Ernest Roy
Cautley, Sir Henry S.


Ashley, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Wilfrid W.
Bourne, Captain Robert Croft
Cayzer, Sir C. (Chester, City)


Astor, Maj. Hn. John J. (Kent, Dover)
Bowater, Col. Sir T. Vansittart
Cayzer, Maj. Sir Herbt. R. (Prtsmth, S.)


Astor, Viscountess
Bowyer, Captain Sir George E. W.
Chadwick, Sir Robert Burton


Atholl, Duchess of
Boyce, H. L.
Chamberlain, Rt. Hn. Sir J. A. (Birm., W.)


Baldwin, Rt. Hon. Stanley (Bewdley)
Bracken, B.
Christie, J. A.


Balfour, George (Hampstead)
Brown, Col. D. C. (N'th'l'd., Hexham)
Churchill, Rt. Hon. Winston Spencer


Beaumont, M. W.
Brown, Brig.-Gen. H. C. (Berks, Newb'y)
Cockerill, Brig.-General Sir George


Bellairs, Commander Carlyon
Buckingham, Sir H.
Colville, Major D. J.




Courtauld, Major J. S.
Hope, Sir Harry (Forfar)
Salmon, Major I.


Crichton-stuart, Lord C.
Howard-Bury, Colonel C. K.
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)


Croft, Brigadier-General Sir H.
Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hackney, N.)
Samuel, Samuel (W'dsworth, Putney)


Culverwell, C. T. (Bristol, West)
Hurd, Percy A.
Sandeman, Sir N. Stewart


Cunliffe-Lister, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip
Hurst, Sir Gerald B.
Sassoon, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip A. G. D.


Dairymple-White, Lt.-Col, Sir Godfrey
Iveagh, Countess of
Savery, S. S.


Davidson, Rt. Hon. J. (Hertford)
James, Lieut.-Colonel Hon. Cuthbert
Simms, Major-General J.


Davidson, Major-General Sir J. H.
King, Commodore Rt. Hon. Henry D.
Sinclair, Col. T. (Queen's U., Belfst)


Davies, Dr. Vernon
Knox, Sir Alfred
Skelton, A. N.


Davies, Maj. Geo. F. (Somerset, Yeovil)
Lamb, Sir J. Q.
Smith, Louis W. (Sheffield, Hallam)


Duckworth, G. A. V.
Lane Fox, Col. Ht. Hon. George R.
Smith, R. W. (Aberd'n & Kinc'dine, C.)


Dugdale, Capt. T. L.
Leighton, Major B. E. P.
Smith-Carington, Neville W.


Edmondson, Major A. J.
Little, Dr. E. Graham
Smithers, Waldron


Elliot, Major Walter E.
Llewellin, Major J. J.
Somerset, Thomas


Erskine, Lord (Somerset, Weston-s. M.)
Long, Major Eric
Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)


Everard, W. Lindsay
McConnell, Sir Joseph
Southby, Commander A. R. J.


Falle, Sir Bertram G.
MacRobert, Rt. Hon. Alexander M.
Spender-Clay, Colonel H.


Ferguson, Sir John
Maitland, A. (Kent, Faversham)
Stanley, Maj. Hon. O. (W'morland)


Fermoy, Lord
Makins, Brigadier-General E.
Steel-Maitland, Rt. Hon. Sir Arthur


Fielden, E. B.
Meller, R. J.
Sueter, Rear-Admiral M. F.


Fison, F. G. Clavering
Merriman, Sir F. Boyd
Thomson, Sir F.


Ford, Sir P. J.
Mitchell, Sir W. Lane (Streatham)
Todd, Capt. A. J.


Forestier-Walker, Sir L.
Mond, Hon. Henry
Train, J.


Fremantle, Lieut.-Colonel Francis E.
Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. Sir B.
Tryon, Rt. Hon. George Clement


Galbraith, J. F. W.
Moore, Sir Newton J. (Richmond)
Turton, Robert Hugh


Ganzoni, Sir John
Morrison, W. S. (Glos., Cirencester)
Vaughan-Morgan, Sir Kenyon


Gault, Lieut.-Col. Andrew Hamilton
Muirhead, A. J.
Wallace, Capt. D. E. (Hornsey)


Glyn, Major R. G. C.
Newton, Sir D. G. C. (Cambridge)
Ward, Lieut.-Col. Sir A. Lambert


Gower, Sir Robert
Nicholson, Col. Rt. Hn. W. G. (Ptrsf'ld)
Warrender, Sir Victor


Grace, John
Nield, Rt. Hon. Sir Herbert
Waterhouse, Captain Charles


Graham, Fergus (Cumberland, N.)
O'Neill, Sir H.
Wells, Sydney R.


Grenfell, Edward C. (City of London)
Ormsby-Gore, Rt. Hon. William
Williams, Com. C. (Devon, Torquay)


Gretton, Colonel Rt. Hon. John
Peake, Capt. Osbert
Wilson, G. H. A. (Cambridge U.)


Gritten, W. G. Howard
Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings)
Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George


Guinness, Rt. Hon. Walter E.
Peto, Sir Basil E. (Devon, Barnstaple)
Withers, Sir John James


Gunston, Captain D. W.
Pownall, Sir Assheton
Weimer, Rt. Hon. Viscount


Hamilton, Sir George (Ilford)
Purbrick, R.
Womersley, W. J.


Hanbury, C.
Ramsbotham, H.
Worthington-Evans, Rt. Hon. Sir L.


Hartington, Marquess of
Reid, David D. (County Down)
Young, Rt. Hon. Sir Hilton


Harvey, Major S. E. (Devon, Totnes)
Remer, John R.



Haslam, Henry C.
Rentoul, Sir Gervais S.
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Heneage, Lieut.-Colonel Arthur P.
Roberts, Sir Samuel (Ecclesall)
Captain Margesson and Sir George


Hennessy, Major Sir G. R. J.
Rodd, Rt. Hon. Sir James Rennell
Penny.


Hills, Major Rt. Hon. John Waller
Ruggles-Brise, Lieut.-Colonel E. A.

The DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN: I must rule out of order the next Amendment standing in the name of the hon. and gallant Member for Uxbridge (Major Llewellin)—in line 32, at the end, to insert the word:
(7) Any costs ordered by the Railway and Canal Commission to be paid by the Coal Mines Reorganisation Commission under this Act shall be defrayed out of moneys proved by Parliament.

Sir P. CUNLIFFE-LISTER: On that point of Order. May I submit that the Financial Resolution is wide enough to cover this Amendment. The Financial Resolution, as originally introduced, was rather narrow in form. It was then withdrawn in order to make it the widest Financial Resolution which has ever been introduced into this House, and the Financial Resolution in terms covered any provision which may be introduced into the Bill. The actual words of the Financial Resolution were:
and such other expenses as may be required to be defrayed for the purposes of the said Act.
I submit that the provision that the Railway and Canal Commission shall
have jurisdiction over costs must be within the scope of this Bill, because, in the Clause that stands in the name of the President of the Board of Trade, express directions are given as to how the Railway and Canal Commission are to apportion coats. When a case is presented to the Railway and Canal Commission by the Board of Trade, there is a direction in the later Clause to say that the Railway and Canal Commission must direct the parties to the action to pay all costs which have been incurred by the Board of Trade in preparing the case and so on. I submit that plainly, with that Amendment standing on the Order Paper directing the Railway and Canal Commission to order that all costs including everything done by the Board or Trade shall be paid by the party, it must be in order to move an Amendment to say that the Railway and Canal Commission shall have a discretion as to ordering the payment of costs. That plainly must be in Order. If the Railway and Canal Commission are to have that discretion, then they must be able to order the Board of Trade to pay part
of the costs in an action instituted by them. I submit that, if that power is to exist, we ought to take power under this Clause for the payment by the Board of Trade of such costs as the Railway and Canal Commission direct shall be paid by them. It is an Amendment plainly within the scope of the Bill, and, indeed, within the specific words of the Clauses which the right hon. Gentleman is going to move. I submit that it is clearly within the Financial Resolution, which was intended to be drawn so as to cover any Amendment of this kind, and in fact provides:
Of such other expenses as may be required to be defrayed for the purposes of the said Act.
It is an expense for the purposes of this Bill that the Board of Trade go to the Railway and Canal Commission and prepare their case. It must equally be an expense for the purpose of this Bill if the Railway and Canal Commission direct that the Board of Trade shall pay part of the costs and not that they shall recover the whole of the cost from the other party.

The DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN: That is a very long point of Order. I must still adhere to my Ruling, and I would call the attention of the right hon. Gentleman to paragraph (i, d) of the Money Resolution, which lays it down quite clearly—
that a sum equal to the amount of any expenses incurred by the employment of such agents as aforesaid"—
that is, technical and professional agents—
for the purpose of promoting or assisting the amalgamation of any undertakings consisting of or comprising coal mines shall, in the event of the undertakings being amalgamated, be repaid to the Board of Trade by the owners of the amalgamated undertaking.
I submit that that paragraph lays down definitely the source from which the expenses must come for that particular provision. The provision made in paragraph (ii) is for a different purpose entirely, and not for this particular purpose. Therefore, I must rule that I cannot accept this Amendment.

Sir P. CUNLIFFE-LISTER: This obviously raises a tremendously important point. Do I understand your Ruling to be that the Financial Resolution, by authorising, in the words which you have
read, that the cost of all these inquiries shall be repaid by the parties to the action, binds the House of Commons, so that no Amendment can be moved to the provisions of the Bill?

The DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN: Not this particular Amendment.

Sir P. CUNLIFFE-LISTER: As I understand it, the Financial Resolution authorises the President of the Board of Trade to present certain Clauses, and authorises the House of Commons to amend those Clauses in any way, provided the Financial Resolution be not exceeded. The words of the Financial Resolution have to be wide enough to cover whatever proposals the Government put forward, but I submit, with great respect, that, provided we do not exceed the financial provisions which are laid down in the Resolution, it: is the inalienable right of the House of Commons to amend the Bill in any way it pleases. With great respect, if your Ruling were to extend to say that, because provision is made in the Financial Resolution, the costs may be paid in a particular way, and that the House of Commons cannot vary that, it would make it absolutely impossible to amend any of these Clauses. The Financial Resolution has, I submit, always been held to be an enabling power setting out the limits within which money may be spent, but in no case has a Financial Resolution ever been held to be a compelling power telling the House that they must spend the money in that way and in no other way.

The DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN: In this particular Financial Resolution, the precise source is laid down definitely and clearly. The House of Commons has tied my hands; I am not tying the hands of the Committee. The House has definitely decided that such expenses shall come from a particular source and, if that is altered and made a charge, it will be a new charge entirely, and a charge which Parliament has decided shall be met from a particular source. I must, therefore, adhere to my decision, and rule the Amendment out of order.

Sir P. CUNLIFFE-LISTER: rose—

HON. MEMBERS: Order, order!

The SECRETARY of STATE for WAR (Mr. T. Shaw): It has been repeatedly stated.

Sir P. CUNLIFFE-LISTER: The right hon. Gentleman has been long enough in the House to know that the clarifying of a Ruling of the Chair is not only the privilege, but the duty of those who take part in the Debates.

Mr. KNIGHT: On a point of Order—

The DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN: The right hon. Gentleman is quite in order.

Sir P. CUNLIFFE-LISTER: I submit that the words of this Resolution are an enabling power which say that certain moneys may be spent in a certain way. What I am proposing is no increase at all in the charging power. All I am proposing is that within the limits of that power there shall be discretion.

The DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN: I must rule against the right hon. Gentleman. The Amendment would make a new charge entirely upon the State, and the House has decided by the Money Resolution that this charge shall not be a charge upon the State, but shall be a charge upon the amalgamations which are successful in completing their amalgamations. I therefore rule that this would be a new charge on the State.

Commodore KING: The words in paragraph (i, d) which you quoted, Mr. Dunnico, refer to costs in preparation of a scheme before the Commission, whereas our Amendment refers to costs in the action before the Railway and Canal Commission.

The DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN: I cannot alter my Ruling.

Mr. KNIGHT: Is it in order, when you have given your Ruling, for right hon. Gentlemen to discuss that Ruling?

The DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN: I give my Ruling, and, if any further information is given, it is always open to the Chair to alter that Ruling. Therefore, I am always quite willing to listen to hon. Gentlemen. In this case, however, the points raised confirm me in declining to alter it. With regard to the next Amendment in the name of the hon. Gentleman for Chislehurst (Mr. Smithers)—at the end of the Clause to add the words:
( ) It shall be lawful for the Lord Chancellor, if he thinks fit, to remove for inability or misbehaviour any appointed commissioner.
I am doubtful whether it is in order, and I would ask the hon. Gentleman to explain it.

Mr. SMITHERS: When the commissioners are appointed, any one of them who misbehaves himself or does anything wrong can be dismissed by the President of the Board of Trade. Sub-section (4) of this Clause which is very important, reads:
If a commissioner becomes disqualified for holding office, or fails to comply with the provisions of the last foregoing Sub-section, or becomes in the opinion of the Board of Trade unfit to continue in office or incapable of performing his duties under his Act, the Board shall forthwith declare his office to be vacant, and shall notify the fact in such manner as they think fit, and thereupon the office shall become vacant.
I ask the Committee whether it is fair on the President of the Board of Trade to be given these extremely dictatorial powers? After all, the President has appointed the commissioners, and, supposing one of them in the execution of his duty finds that in these amalgamations—

The DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN: Does the hon. Member propose in this Amendment to transfer the power from the President of the Board of Trade to the Lord Chancellor?

Mr. SMITHERS: Yes

The DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN: It is out of order then.

Mr. SMITHERS: May I respectfully point out that this Sub-section—

The DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN: If the intention of this Amendment is to transfer the power from the President of the Board of Trade to the Lord Chancellor it is out of order, because that has already been passed in an earlier part of the Clause.

Mr. SMITHERS: May I say a word on it?

The DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN: No, my Ruling is quite definite,

Mr. SMITHERS: With great respect, is there any reason why both the President of the Board of Trade and the Lord Chancellor should not have concurrent powers?

The DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN: That is obviously not the intention of the Amend-
ment. My first intention was to rule the Amendment out of order, but I gave the opportunity to the hon. Gentleman to state his intention. He has stated his intention; I accept that intention, and I rule the Amendment out of order, and I cannot now allow him to alter his intention having expressed it.

Mr. SMITHERS: I beg to move, as an Amendment to the proposed Clause, at the end, to add the words:
( ) The central office of the Commission shall be in London.
It has been represented to me that there is a section of opinion which would like to have the headquarters of the Commission out of London. When we think of the work which the commissioners have to do, extending from Durham and Northumberland to Yorkshire, from Warwickshire down to Kent and Wales, we would agree that there is only one place for the headquarters. The Commission is appointed by the Board of Trade, and it should be in constant touch with the Board. That is essential. I have an Amendment further on as to continual touch being kept between the commissioners and the Board of Trade, and I hope that the President will see his way to accept this Amendment. If it is not accepted, we shall find, after all this has quietened down and the Bill becomes

law, that there will be a movement to get the central office elsewhere.

Mr. TURNER: I am quite certain that this Amendment is not necessary. Subsection (5) gives the commissioners power to regulate their own procedure, and it is not wise to tie them down in this particular fashion. They will know their business best as to where the headquarters should be, and I do not think the proposal is necessary or that it can be accepted.

Mr. SMITHERS: I have made this contribution with a real desire to help, and I am disappointed at the way in which it has been received and dismissed in a few words without a fuller reason being given. In every Amendment I have moved, I have tried to contribute to the Bill. Here is a simple Amendment which I have reason for moving, and I do not feel that sufficient consideration has been given to it. For the better working of the Commission, it should be near the Board of Trade; it is essential, therefore, that the headquarters should be in London. I am very disappointed that the Secretary for Mines has not accepted the Amendment.

Question put, "That those words be there added."

The Committee divided: Ayes, 139; Noes, 284.

Division No. 179.]
AYES.
[7.31 p.m.


Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel
Croom-Johnson, R. P.
Harvey, Major S. E. (Devon, Totnes)


Albery, Irving James
Culverwell, C. T. (Bristol, West)
Heneage, Lieut.-Colonel Arthur P.


Ashley, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Wilfrid W.
Cunliffe-Lister, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip
Hennessy, Major Sir G. R. J.


Astor, Maj. Hon. John J. (Kent, Dover)
Davidson, Rt. Hon. J. (Hertford)
Hills, Major Rt. Hon. John Walter


Baldwin, Rt. Hon. Stanley (Bewdley)
Davidson, Major-General Sir J. H.
Hope, Sir Harry (Forfar)


Balfour, Captain H. H. (I. of Thanet)
Davies, Dr. Vernon
Howard-Bury, Colonel C. K.


Beaumont, M. W.
Davies, Maj. Geo. F. (Somerset, Yeovil)
Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hackney, N.)


Bellairs, Commander Carlyon
Duckworth, G. A. V.
Hurd, Percy A.


Bevan, S. J. (Holborn)
Dugdale, Capt. T. L.
Hurst, Sir Gerald B.


Birchall, Major Sir John Dearman
Edmondson, Major A. J.
Iveagh, Countess of


Bourne, Captain Robert Croft
Elliot, Major Walter E.
James, Lieut.-Colonel Hon. Cuthbert


Bowyer, Captain Sir George E. W.
Erskine, Lord (Somerset, Weston-s. M.)
King, Commodore Rt. Hon. Henry D.


Boyce, H. L.
Everard, W. Lindsay
Lamb, Sir J. Q.


Bracken, B.
Falle, Sir Bertram G.
Little, Dr. E. Graham


Brass, Captain Sir William
Fielden, E. B.
Llewellin, Major J. J.


Brown, Col. D. C. (N'th'l'd., Hexham)
Fison, F. G. Clavering
McConnell, Sir Joseph


Brown, Brig.-Gen. H. C. (Berks, Newb'y)
Ford, Sir P. J.
MacRobert, Rt. Hon. Alexander M.


Butler, R. A.
Forestier-Walker, Sir L.
Maitland, A. (Kent, Faversham)


Cadogan, Major Hon. Edward
Fremantle, Lieut.-Colonel Francis E.
Makins, Brigadier-General E.


Castle Stewart, Earl of
Galbraith, J. F. W.
Margesson, Captain H. D.


Cautley, Sir Henry S.
Ganzoni, Sir John
Meller, R. J.


Cayzer, Sir C. (Chester, City)
Gibson, C. G. (Pudsey & Otley)
Merriman, Sir F. Boyd


Cayzer, Maj. Sir Herbt. R. (Prtsmth, S.)
Glyn, Major R. G. C.
Mitchell, Sir W. Lane (Streatham)


Chadwick, Sir Robert Burton
Gower, Sir Robert
Mond, Hon. Henry


Chamberlain, Rt. Hn. Sir J. A. (Birm., W.)
Grace, John
Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. Sir B.


Christle, J. A.
Graham, Fergus (Cumberland, N.)
Morrison, W. S. (Glos., Cirencester)


Churchill, Rt. Hon. Winston Spencer
Grenfell, Edward C. (City of London)
Muirhead, A. J.


Colman, N. C. D.
Gritten, W. G. Howard
Newton, Sir D. G. C. (Cambridge)


Colville, Major D. J.
Gunston, Captain D. W.
Nield, Rt. Hon. Sir Herbert


Courtauld, Major J. S.
Hamilton, Sir George (Ilford)
O'Neill, Sir H.


Crichton-Stuart, Lord C.
Hanbury, C.
Ormsby-Gore, Rt. Hon. William


Croft, Brigadier-General Sir H.
Hartington, Marquess of
Peake, Capt. Osbert


Penny, Sir George
Simms, Major-General J.
Train, J.


Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings)
Sinclair, Col. T. (Queen's U., Belfast)
Turton, Robert Hugh


Peto, Sir Basil E. (Devon, Barnstaple)
Skelton, A. N.
Vaughan-Morgan, Sir Kenyon


Pownall, Sir Assheton
Smith, Louis W. (Sheffield, Hallam)
Ward, Lieut.-Col. Sir A. Lambert


Ramsbotham, H.
Smith, R. W. (Aberd'n & Kinc'dine, C.)
Waterhouse, Captain Charles


Reid, David D. (County Down)
Smith-Carington, Neville W.
Wells, Sydney R.


Remer, John R.
Smithers, Waldron
Wilson, G. H. A. (Cambridge U.)


Rentoul, Sir Gervais S.
Somerset, Thomas
Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George


Richardson, Sir P. W. (Sur'y, Ch'ts'y)
Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)
Withers, Sir John James


Roberts, Sir Samuel (Ecclesall)
Southby, Commander A. R. J.
Womersley, W. J.


Rodd, Rt. Hon. Sir James Rennell
Spender-Clay, Colonel H.
Worthington-Evans, Rt. Hon. Sir L.


Ruggles-Brise, Lieut.-Colonel E. A.
Stanley, Maj. Hon. O. (W'morland)



Salmon, Major I.
Steel-Maitland, Rt. Hon. Sir Arthur
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)
Sueter, Rear-Admiral M. F.
Captain Wallace and Sir Victor


Samuel, Samuel (W'dsworth, Putney)
Thomson, Sir F.
Warrender.


Sandeman, Sir N. Stewart
Todd, Capt. A. J.



NOES.


Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife, West)
Gardner, B. W. (West Ham, Upton)
Leach, W.


Adamson, W. M. (Staff., Cannock)
George, Major G. Lloyd (Pembroke)
Lee, Frank (Derby, N. E.)


Addison, Rt. Hon. Dr. Christopher
Gibbins, Joseph
Lee, Jennie (Lanark, Northern)


Aitchison, Rt. Hon. Craigle M.
Gibson, H. M. (Lancs. Mossley)
Lees, J.


Alpass, J. H.
Gill, T. H.
Lewis, T. (Southampton)


Ammon, Charles George
Gillett, George M.
Lloyd, C. Ellis


Angell, Norman
Glassey, A. E.
Longbottom, A. W.


Aske, Sir Robert
Gossling, A. G.
Longden, F.


Attlee, Clement Richard
Gould, F.
Lowth, Thomas


Ayles, Walter
Graham, D. M. (Lanark, Hamilton)
Lunn, William


Baker, John (Wolverhampton, Bilston)
Graham, Rt. Hon. Wm. (Edin., Cent.)
Macdonald, Gordon (Ince)


Baldwin, Oliver (Dudley)
Granville, E.
MacDonald, Rt. Hon. J. R. (Seaham)


Barnes, Alfred John
Gray, Milner
McElwee, A.


Batey, Joseph
Greenwood, Rt. Hon. A. (Colne)
McEntee, V. L.


Beckett, John (Camberwell, Peckham)
Grenfell, D. R, (Glamorgan)
McKinlay, A.


Bellamy, Albert
Griffith, F. Kingsley (Middlesbro' W.)
MacLaren, Andrew


Benn, Rt. Hon. Wedgwood
Griffiths, T. (Monmouth, Pontypool)
Maclean, Sir Donald (Cornwall, N.)


Bennett, Captain E. N. (Cardiff, Central)
Groves, Thomas E.
MacNeill-Weir, L.


Bennett, William (Battersea, South)
Grundy, Thomas W.
McShane, John James


Benson, G.
Hall, F. (York, W. R., Normanton)
Malone, C. L'Estrange (N'thampton)


Bentham, Dr. Ethel
Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)
Mander, Geoffrey le M.


Bevan, Aneurin (Ebbw Vale)
Hail, Capt. W. P. (Portsmouth, C.)
Mansfield, W.


Birkett, W. Norman
Hamilton, Mary Agnes (Blackburn)
March, S.


Blindell, James
Hamilton, Sir R. (Orkney & Zetland)
Marcus, M.


Bondfield, Rt. Hon. Margaret
Hardie, George D.
Markham, S. F.


Bowen, J. W.
Harris, Percy A.
Marley, J.


Bowerman, Rt. Hon. Charles W.
Hartshorn, Rt. Hon. Vernon
Marshall, F.


Broad, Francis Alfred
Hastings, Dr. Somerville
Mathers, George


Brockway, A. Fenner
Haycock, A. W.
Matters, L. W.


Bromfield, William
Heyday, Arthur
Maxton, James


Bromley, J.
Hayes, John Henry
Melville, Sir James


Brooke, W.
Henderson, Arthur, Junr. (Cardiff, S.)
Messer, Fred


Brothers, M.
Henderson, Thomas (Glasgow)
Millar, J. D.


Brown, C. W. E. (Notts, Mansfield)
Henderson, W. W. (Middx., Enfield)
Milner, J.


Brown, Ernest (Leith)
Herriotts, J.
Montague, Frederick


Brown, James (Ayr and Bute)
Hirst, G. H. (York, W. R., Wentworth)
Morgan, Dr. H. B.


Buchanan, G.
Hoffman, P. C.
Morley, Ralph


Burgess, F. G.
Hollins, A.
Morris, Rhys Hopkins


Burgin, Dr. E. L.
Horrabin, J. F.
Morris-Jones, Dr. J. H. (Denbigh)


Buxton, C. R. (Yorks. W. R. Elland)
Hudson, James K. (Huddersfield)
Morrison, Herbert (Hackney, South)


Calne, Derwent Hall-
Hunter, Dr. Joseph
Morrison, Robert C. (Tottenham, N.)


Cameron, A. G.
Hutchison, Maj.-Gen. Sir R.
Mart, D. L.


Cape, Thomas
Isaacs, George
Moses, J. J. H.


Carter, W (St. Pancras, S. W.)
Jenkins, W. (Glamorgan, Neath)
Mosley, Lady C. (Stoke-on-Trent)


Charleton, H. C.
John, William (Rhondda, West)
Mosley, Sir Oswald (Smethwick)


Chater, Daniel
Johnston, Thomas
Muggeridge, H. T.


Clarke, J. S.
Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)
Nathan, Major H. L.


Cluse, W. S.
Jones, J. J. (West Ham, Silvertown)
Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter)


Cocks, Frederick Seymour
Jones, Rt. Hon. Leif (Camborne)
Noel Baker, P. J.


Compton, Joseph
Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)
Oldfield, J. R.


Cove, William G.
Jowett, Rt. Hon. F. W.
Oliver, George Harold (Ilkeston)


Daggar, George
Jowitt, Rt. Hon. Sir W. A.
Oliver, P. M. (Man., Blackley)


Dalias, George
Kedward, R. M. (Kent, Ashford)
Owen, Major G. (Carnarvon)


Davies, E. C. (Montgomery)
Kelly, W. T.
Palin, John Henry


Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)
Kennedy, Thomas
Paling, Wilfrid


Day, Harry
Kinley, J.
Palmer, E. T.


Denman, Hon. R. D.
Kirkwood, D.
Parkinson, John Alien (Wigan)


Dudgeon, Major C. R.
Knight, Holford
Perry, S. F.


Dukes, C.
Lambert, Rt. Hon. George (S. Molton)
Pethick-Lawrence, F. W.


Duncan, Charles
Lang, Gordon
Phillips, Dr. Marion


Ede, James Chuter
Lansbury, Rt. Hon. George
Picton-Turbervill, Edith


Edmunds, J. E.
Law, Albert (Bolton)
Potts, John S.


Edwards, E. (Morpeth)
Law, A. (Rosendale)
Price, M. P.


Egan, W. H.
Lawrence, Susan
Quibell, D. J. K.


Evans, Capt. Ernest (Welsh Univ.)
Lawrie, Hugh Hartley (Stalybridge)
Ramsay, T. B. Wilson


Freeman, Peter
Lawther, W. (Barnard Castle)
Rathbone, Eleanor




Raynes, W. R.
Simmons, C. J.
Viant, S. P.


Richards, R.
Sinclair, Sir A. (Caithness)
Walker, J.


Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)
Sinkinson, George
Wallace, H. W.


Riley, Ben (Dewsbury)
Smith, Alfred (Sunderland)
Wallhead, Richard C.


Riley, F. F. (Stockton-on-Tees)
Smith, Frank (Nuneaton)
Watkins, F. C.


Ritson, J.
Smith, H. B. Lees (Keighley)
Watson, W. M. (Dunfermline).


Roberts, Rt. Hon. F. O. (W. Bromwich)
Smith, Rennie (Penistone)
Wellock, Wilfred


Romeril, H. G.
Smith, Tom (Pontefract)
Welsh, James (Paisley)


Rosbotham, D. S. T.
Smith, W. R. (Norwich)
Welsh, James C. (Coatbridge)


Rowson, Guy
Snell, Harry
West, F. R.


Runciman, Rt. Hon. Walter
Snowden, Rt. Hon. Philip
Westwood, Joseph


Russell, Richard John (Eddisbury)
Snowden, Thomas (Accrington)
Wheatley, Rt. Hon. J.


Salter, Dr. Alfred
Sorensen, R.
Whiteley, Wilfrid (Birm., Ladywood)


Samuel, Rt. Hon. Sir H. (Darwen)
Stamford, Thomas W.
Whiteley, William (Blaydon)


Samuel, H. W. (Swansea, West)
Stephen, Campbell
Wilkinson, Ellen C.


Sanders, W. S.
Stewart, J. (St. Rollox)
Williams, David (Swansea, East)


Sandham, E.
Strachey, E. J. St. Loe
Williams, Dr. J. H. (Llanelly)


Sawyer, G. F.
Strauss, G. R.
Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)


Scott, James
Sullivan, J.
Wilson, C. H. (Sheffield. Attercliffe)


Scurr, John
Sutton, J. E.
Wilson, J. (Oldham)


Sexton, James
Taylor, R. A. (Lincoln)
Wilson R. J. (Jarrow)


Shakespeare, Geoffrey H.
Taylor, W. B. (Norfolk, S. W.)
Winterton, G. E. (Leicester, Loughb'gh)


Shaw, Rt. Hon. Thomas (Preston)
Thomas, Rt. Hon. J. H. (Derby)
Wise, E. F.


Shepherd, Arthur Lewis
Thurtle, Ernest
Wood, Major McKenzie (Banff)


Sherwood, G. H.
Tinker, John Joseph
Wright, W. (Rutherglen)


Shield, George William
Tout, W. J.
Young, R. S. (Islington, North)


Shiels, Dr. Drummond
Townend, A. E.



Shillaker, J. F.
Trevelyan, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Shinwell, E.
Turner, B.
Mr. Charles Edwards and Mr. B.


Short, Alfred (Wednesbury)
Vaughan, D. J.
Smith.

Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Clause, as amended, be added to the Bill."

Sir P. CUNLIFFE-LISTER: Before the Committee part with this Clause I hope the President of the Board of Trade will give us some clearer information as to who these commissioners are to be and how they are to work. I regret that he was unwilling to accept the Amendment which would have named these commissioners to the House. I think it would have facilitated the passage of the Bill if he had given way, though I really do not think it was a question of giving way, because he showed himself willing to meet the Committee; and I still venture to hope that when he reconsiders the position, which involves no question of amour propre, he will realise that the reason why the House desires to have the names is that we may be satisfied that the men who are appointed are men of real standing, who will inspire confidence. After all, I do not know whether the right hon. Gentleman is always going to be President of the Board of Trade.

Mr. J. JONES: Lord Beaverbrook will soon be that.

Sir P. CUNLIFFE-LISTER: Oh, I do not think—[Interruption.]

Mr. BATEY: Lord Beaverbrook will kill your party.

Sir P. CUNLIFFE-LISTER: We have got to legislate for all time, or at any rate for the duration of this Measure. I say quite frankly that if the right hon. Gentleman said to me, "I am going to appoint some very good men, and I am going to have the appointment of them entirely in my hands," I should probably be fairly satisfied with the appointments he would be likely to make; but I would not say that of everybody who might hold his office, and after all, he has to legislate for his successors as well as for himself. I ask him whether he cannot give us some hope that when we come to the Report stage he will either be able to tell us who the commissioners are to be, or that he will reconsider the position and say that before these commissioners are appointed the House shall have an opportunity of knowing who they are in a form which, if necessary, can be debated. Indeed, this would be the more reasonable course, because if the right hon. Gentleman is so sure of being able to get the best men he is really giving away nothing by offering us the chance of debating the appointments. If they are the kind of people I should expect he would appoint I certainly should not wish to debate them myself. Failing that will he tell us what he is going to look for in these people?

Mr. KIRKWOOD: They will be neither engineers nor miners. You can take that from me. They will be from your class.

Sir P. CUNLIFFE-LISTER: I understood the Chancellor of the Exchequer said to-day that people of intelligence would be selected.

Mr. KIRKWOOD: Exactly so.

Mr. J. JONES: And you will not be one of them.

Sir P. CUNLIFFE-LISTER: I have always been able to keep myself without seeking for a Government appointment. [Interruption.] Let the hon. Member for Dumbarton Burghs (Mr. Kirk-wood) talk as much as he likes. I shall get on rather quicker if he interjects less. What are the qualifications which will be required of these commissioners? Are we to have a barrister among them? Obviously there will be important legal questions to be considered, and I imagine it will be necessary to have a man who is either a barrister or a solicitor of very considerable standing. It may be that a mining engineer will be required. I do not know whether the right hon. Gentleman has in mind that he wishes to go outside those professions and find someone else. If so I think he ought to make it plain what are the qualifications that he is looking for. The commissioners will have a task of very great responsibility. If this new Clause is not to be suspect amongst the people whose activities will be covered by the working of this Commission, I think the right hon. Gentleman would be well advised to make it plain what qualifications the commissioners are to have. If the right hon. Gentleman has in mind what those qualifications are to be, then I think he would be well advised to nominate his commissioners and put into the Bill the qualifications which will be required.
I hope the President will be able to say more as to how these commissioners are to be paid. After all the House of Commons is primarily responsible to look after the finances of the nation, and although the financial resolution is pretty generous in its terms—I know that it is not generous enough for some hon. Members opposite—it is almost lavish in the power it gives to the President of the Board of Trade to spend money. I think we ought to have some idea of the sort of salary that is to be paid, and the sort of people that are contemplated for these appointments. That is not an unreason-
able request. I have often piloted money Bills through the House of Commons, and I have always been expected to give a very full and precise estimate of the expenditure. For these reasons I think we should hear a little more on that subject before we part with this new Clause.
I am still in the dark as to how the commissioners are going to work. I understand that the only provision in the Bill is that they shall sit together when they propose a scheme. I want to know before they set to work on any proposition whether the Commission will act as a composite body, or will these five gentlemen set out all over the country, bring in returns from different parts, and suggest any proposals that they like? That is a very relevant question, and I think the original proposal by the right hon. Gentleman was reasonably fair. It is true that this Commission was really an inquisitorial body; but they were to report, and their action was to be the corporate action of the Commission. I am not sure that under pressure of Members below the Gangway the Government have not departed from that, and I want to know how far they have departed from their original idea. Is this going to be a Commission of responsible men whose acts are to be regarded as corporate acts? They cannot set out on independent inquiries all over the country if their plan is to be the considered plan of a corporate body. If, on the other hand, these five gentlemen are to be sent out like scouts by the President of the Board of Trade scouting in each area—[Interruption]—well that is the opinion of the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Darwen (Sir H. Samuel)—each of them bringing up some scheme or some recommendation which he thinks is advisable, and we only get corporate action when they reach the last stage, if that is the procedure then I feel sure that the mining industry will be a good deal more anxious than if the Commission had to act as a corporate body.
I ask the President to state plainly whether the action which the Commission takes, and any decision upon which action is taken, will be the corporate decision of the Commission as a whole, and not the individual action of any one commissioner. I am sure that that was the original intention, because the commissioners were first introduced as a cor-
porate body. I am very sceptical as to the action the commissioners are likely to take as a corporate body, because they will have to do a great deal of investigation, and I do not think they will produce a very large number of schemes. I think we shall waste much time and money if every member of the Commission is sent out on a different hunt of his own, and in that way we shall waste a good deal more money than if the action of the commissioners is confined to the considered action of the whole corporate body. I should like the President to give the Committee further enlightenment on those points.

Sir GEORGE HAMILTON: It is laid down in this Clause that a commissioner shall not be concerned
in any company carrying on the business of coal mining or supplying or selling coal or the manufacture or sale of by-products of coal or machinery or plant for coal mining.
When the successor of the President of the Board of Trade is looking for a commissioner, I should think one of the most suitable people to appoint would be a mining engineer who has had experience out in Canada who has made his little bit out there, and has a considerable number of shares in a Canadian mine. If that man came over to this country and the President invited him to become a commissioner, he would have to sell all the shares he held in that coal mine, although it was in Canada. The hon. Member for Middleton (Sir N. Stewart Sandeman) raised this question, but the President of the Board of Trade brushed it aside, and said that his proposal did not apply to anyone outside the United Kingdom, and that this was what was known in international circumstances as a global figure.
A large number of people who are engineers in this country have shares in large manufacturing concerns such as the General Electric Company of New York. That company is concerned with the supply of machinery for coal mining in this country, and I suppose that those holding securities in that company would be ruled out. Of course, I do not consider that this is a point of substance, and I shall be satisfied if the President will give me an assurance that he will consider this point and make the Bill apply to shareholders holding an interest in the United King-
dom, so as not to rule out people who might be most useful in running coal mines successfully. Perhaps the President will let me have some assurance on that point.

Mr. RAMSBOTHAM: It would be unfortunate if the impression got abroad in the country that under this new Clause the Commission is to be the creature of the Board of Trade. As the new Clause stands, the President will have a blank cheque in regard to the constitution of the Commission. There is no restriction put upon the right hon. Gentleman by the House, and the House has no control over the salaries to be paid, the class of men to be appointed, or the tenure of their office. This legislation is the responsibility of the House and not the responsibility of the commissioners. After all, the House in the last resort is responsible for the amalgamation Clauses. I suggest to the President that it will be a very slight concession to accept the principle that this House should have power to control the constitution of this Commission.
Possibly the right hon. Gentleman may relent at a later stage; I believe his present attitude is due to the vagueness which he himself feels about this Commission. I do not believe that the Board of Trade have any idea as to whom they are going to appoint, what class of people they want, what they will pay them, or how long they will keep them. I believe the reason is that these Clauses, as far as the President of the Board of Trade is concerned, are an unwanted child, and the right hon. Gentleman is in doubt as to what class of nurse he wants for his unwanted child. I should have thought that the President of the Board of Trade would have welcomed the possibility of putting the responsibility on the House for the appointment of these most important people for the working of what is now acknowledged to be a most important Clause. I suppose it is too late for the President to change his mind, but I feel most strongly that both sides of the House would have cooperated in insisting that this House should have an opportunity of saying something as regards the appointment of these commissioners. They are very important, and may become more important; if they fail in their duty, the result will be disastrous, and that is
why I think this House should have an opportunity of saying something about the terms of their appointment.

8.0 p.m.

Mr. W. GRAHAM: Perhaps the Committee will permit a brief reply at this stage. I can summarise the Government attitude regarding the points which have been raised. I take first the appointment of the commissioners and the question of a possible commissioner having a holding in some mine, colonial or Dominion or foreign. As I read this Clause, anyone who has an investment of that kind would not be barred from acting as a commissioner. It is quite true that on looking at the words of the Clause they appear to be capable of very wide interpretation. I imagine, for example, that as regards the importation of coal no question would arise, because little or no coal is imported into this country. Probably there is no great problem as regards colliery undertakings, but there might be a problem in the case of the manufacture of plant abroad for the use of collieries in this country, if a commissioner had an interest in such an undertaking. After all, we want the widest possible field and the greatest ability made available for this task. I have no hesitation in giving an assurance that if there is any doubt or difficulty, because the words are capable of very wide interpretation, we shall see that proper Amendments are made on report.
The request has been made that the commissioners should be appointed only after an order has been made by the Board of Trade and submitted to this House. On further consideration I feel sure that hon. Members could hardly press that view, because there is no valid precedent for an arrangement of the kind. It is quite unnecessary and very undesirable to clog the machinery of this House with orders and to deprive the Board of Trade and the Minister of Mines of responsibility by further restriction of his departmental authority. There are many safeguards in the Bill, and these were outlined in reply to the speeches on the Amendment—the fact that an early announcement will be made to the House as soon as possible, that questions can be addressed to the Government any day, that it is possible to review the Vote of the Department, and that there are the ordinary processes
of raising the question on the rising of the House. Therefore, I am afraid that with a very real desire to meet the Committee on all these points, I should be wrong in holding out hope that on Report this matter will be reconsidered. If it stood alone it might not be a very great matter, but these things do lead to innumerable difficulties in other directions.
My right hon. Friend the Member for Hendon (Sir P. Cunliffe-Lister) put three questions to me. He asked, Whom do you intend to appoint? What kind of people will you appoint? What class of experience will they have? Plainly, I could not indicate even the probable names of the commissioners. That would be altogether unjust, even if I knew them, or all of them, because this Bill has still to go through the remainder of the Committee stage and Report and Third Reading, and has then to proceed to another place. I cannot go to eminent business men, some of whom may be in mind at the moment, and suggest anything to them until I know the final form that the Bill will take. I am sure, therefore, that the Committee would not expect names from me. But as to probable experience, I have in mind a very eminent accountant, an eminent lawyer, two people who know the coal industry, and someone who is familiar with public administration in a mining area,
I would assure my hon. Friends on this side who are interested more especially in the miners that, in my judgment, the names will be acceptable to them as to other interests, and will command a general confidence. A million men and their dependants and the whole of their interests are vitally affected by these amalgamation schemes. I want to be sure that the social problem presented by the amalgamation processes is adequately kept in mind by a Commission of this kind, not only in the interests of the miners, but of the nation as a whole. I ought to explain here that, although I thought a mining engineer might be one of the commissioners, I am now satisfied that he had much better be one of the advisers of the Commission, because he will render far more conspicuous service in that capacity and will be in a position to make a much more effective contribution. So I tell the Committee frankly in a preliminary way that I have changed my mind to some extent on that point.
In the next place, the right hon. Gentleman asked me what would be the expenditure of the Commission. I wish I could give the exact sum, down to the coppers, that will be expended on these five eminent men, but it is quite impossible to give any estimate of the kind. They are not to be full-time people, to begin with. In the next place, I do not know, and no one knows, how much voluntary amalgamation will be stimulated by the passage of this Bill and by the appearance of these commissioners, or what will be the extent to which, because of voluntary amalgamation, the task of these gentlemen will be simplified, if not very largely removed, in some parts of the country. They must be remunerated to some extent in terms of honorarium or allowance hot disproportionate to what would be some moderate recognition of the work that they perform. I have explained that to get men on full time to give up all their other interests, which would be very large interests in this case, would involve a very large payment. Neither the Board of Trade nor this House nor the men themselves would want that.
But I can say with perfect confidence that only a very small part—it may be so many thousands of pounds—out of the £250,000, will be attributable to this expenditure. The great bulk of the money will be expended on the technical and other assistance essential to the efficient promotion of these schemes. As the Committee has already decided, part of the expenditure will be recoverable from the undertakings which are amalgamated. The expenditure not recoverable will be that incurred in cases in which amalgamation does not proceed, where preliminary expenses have been incurred, but the statutory commissioners, as a result of further investigation, do not proceed before the Railway and Canal Commission. But as regards completed amalgamation the technical expenses will be recoverable. That does not mean that the expenditure need be extravagant. I have no doubt that the commissioners and the industry will do everything possible to keep the expenditure within the lowest possible limits.
Then the right hon. Gentleman asked in what way the commissioners would set about their work. He drew a very
attractive picture of the President of the Board of Trade or my melancholy successor sending out five men to roam the country, with a licence to do practically what they pleased. They were to be five scouts or pioneers in amalgamation. First of all, these five men will have at their disposal at preliminary meetings a survey of the position of the coal industry, more particularly as related to amalgamation. They will know what is done under the Act of 1926. They will have the Reports of the Mines Department. They will have a note of the schemes which are under consideration. They will say, "We had better separate one or two of our members to go to one district to make preliminary inquiries, and one or two to go to another. That would be a very valuable examination, but while, for the purpose of review and investigation, that sub-division will be made, I have already explained that for the larger purposes there must be a quorum of the commissioners, that is three of the commissioners. For the purpose of inquiries under the Tribunals of Inquiry Act, for the purpose of submitting schemes to the Railway and Canal Commission, there must be a quorum; and also for the purpose of certifying the valuation on which these undertakings are to be amalgamated. These are things of substance, and when we come to these issues in these proposals, there must be a quorum of the commissioners. These three would be a majority of the Commission as a whole. I can only express the hope that whatever hon. Members may think, this procedure will provide an effective start, and that by this process of preliminary inquiry from the beginning it will be possible to bring schemes rapidly into efficient operation.

Mr. REID: Before we pass this Clause, I think we ought to realise that here the House is doing something that it has never done before. This Commission, of which the President of the Board of Trade speaks so lightly, is unique in our history. We have heard a great deal to-day about the commissioners being above suspicion. In the case of our Judges, we go so far as to put them in a position in which their salaries are not under the review of the House of Commons, and in which their tenure of office is secure; but here were are setting up a body of five people who are to be
appointed by the President of the Board of Trade, and are to have powers which nobody else in this country has at the present time. They are to have power to go round the coal trade and investigate the affairs of everyone in the coal trade. They are to tell the people in the coal trade what they think about their affairs. They may tell them that they are not to carry on their business in their own way, but are to amalgamate their business with someone else's business. In fact, they are to be a sort of Paul Pry going round the country and spying out what is happening in other people's business.
We know that, when investigations are made by Income Tax officers, they sometimes give rise to a certain amount of feeling, and we know that Income Tax officers are very strictly pledged to regard all the information that comes into their hands as confidential, and not to be used for any purpose other than Income Tax purposes. Here, however, we find that these commissioners are to have the powers given by the Tribunals of Inquiry (Evidence) Act, one of the first of which is the power to enforce the attendance of witnesses, to examine them on oath, and to compel the production of documents; and, further, if any person summoned as a witness should refuse to produce a document or do anything of that kind, the commissioners will have power to bring him before the Courts. These are very extreme powers, and the coal trade is being put in a position in which no other trade or person in the country is put.
This Commission is to be a tribunal within the meaning of the Act to which I have referred, and that Act provides that such a tribunal shall not refuse to allow the public to be present at any proceedings of the tribunal unless it be, in the opinion of the tribunal, in the public interest expedient so to do. I should have liked to ask, if any Law Officer had been present, whether that is going to apply to this Commission, I think that before we pass this Clause we ought to consider very carefully what we are doing and what kind of example we are setting for the future. The right hon. Gentleman was pressed by the former President of the Board of Trade to give some information as to the class of persons from whom these commissioners will be appointed, but he has
given us no further information, I submit that this Clause is quite incomplete, and that the Committee ought to reject it.
This body will be purely and simply the creature of the Board of Trade, the creature of the Minister of the day, to deal with as he chooses, and the result will be to put the whole of the coal trade absolutely in the hands of the President of the Board of Trade for the time being. Again, these powers may have quite unexpected repercussions. Suppose that the commissioners investigate the affairs of a particular company. The mere fact that they have investigated them and not carried through an amalgamation may in itself be very detrimental to the company. I am bound to say that I cannot understand why the Committee seems to take this matter so lightly. If we are going to revolutionise our whole conception of individual freedom and the freedom of people to carry on their business in their own way to the best of their ability, I think that the Committee ought to take the matter into very serious consideration, and I hope that the Clause will not be allowed to stand part of the Bill.

Mr. SMITHERS: I should like to support what the last speaker has said, because I want to reinforce the point of view that this Commission is unique in the history of law-making in this country. I am convinced that compulsory amalgamation can do nothing but harm to the industry to which it is applied. Sub-section (4) of the proposed new Clause provides for the dismissal of one of the commissioners, a power which ought not to be given to the Board of Trade. The Sub-section states that:
If a commissioner becomes disqualified for holding office, or fails to comply with the provisions of the last foregoing Subsection, or becomes in the opinion of the Board of Trade unfit to continue in office or incapable of performing his duties under this Act, the Board shall forthwith declare his office to be vacant, and shall notify the fact in such manner as they think fit, and thereupon the office shall become vacant.
No one has more respect than I have for the present President of the Board of Trade, but, while the Board of Trade, through its permanent officials, goes on continuously, the President of the Board of Trade has of necessity a political bias.
After all, this Bill is a Socialist Bill, brought in by a Socialist President of the Board of Trade, and we know that the right hon. Gentleman himself has had great difficulties, not only with the mining Members of his own party, but with the party below the Gangway, of whom, although their own amalgamation Clause is being discussed, only one Member is here to represent them. [Interruption.] I was referring to the necessary political bias of the President of the Board of Trade, who is a Minister in the Government that happens to be in office, and I say that it is unfair to a Minister representing a political Government—

Mr. LEE: On a point of Order. Are we discussing the functions of the Minister or of the commissioners?

The CHAIRMAN: The hon. Member was pointing out what the Sub-section provides so far as the President of the Board of Trade is concerned.

Mr. SMITHERS: I have been here since a quarter to four, and have followed every word of the Debate, and I think I am in order in discussing Subsection (4) of the proposed new Clause which is now before us. Five commissioners are to be appointed and are to be given certain work to do. Suppose that one of them, desiring very much to do his duty, finds, when he inquires into amalgamation schemes that are put before him, that the obstacles in those schemes are greater than the benefits. Perhaps two commissioners may take such a view. Suppose that the President of the Board of Trade is continually having reported to him the fact that none of these amalgamations can go through because two or three of the commissioners keep on voting against them. It may be his desire, as a Socialist President of the Board of Trade, to get these amalgamations through. Will that be an occasion for the President of the Board of Trade to say that a particular commissioner is not doing his duty, that he is not bringing about amalgamations, and that, therefore, there is power to dismiss him? It does not say in the Clause what misdemeanour he shall commit before he can be dismissed. After all, a commissioner will be a responsible man. If in the execution of his duty he does something to annoy the President of
the Board of Trade, and if he is dismissed, will he have power to appear before the President of the Board of Trade to state his case and to call witnesses with all the facilities of a court of law? For that reason, I am desirous that the power of dismissal shall be taken away from the President of the Board of Trade and given to the Lord Chancellor.

The CHAIRMAN: The hon. Member must not develop that now.

Mr. PALIN: The hon. Member is trying it on again.

Mr. SMITHERS: That is a most unfair remark to make.

Mr. PALIN: It is an absolutely truthful one.

Mr. SMITHERS: The hon. Member said I was trying it on again. I appeal to you, Sir. Why should I be talked to like that across the Floor?

Mr. PALIN: Why should we have this time after time when it has been ruled out of order?

The CHAIRMAN: The hon. Member will learn by experience to keep to the question before the Committee.

Mr. SMITHERS: The only reason why my Clause is out of order is that, through an error, I put it in the wrong place. I shall consult some legal friends before the Report stage to see in what way I shall be in order in moving to omit Subsection (4) and to insert in its place some proposal which will transfer the power of dismissal from the President of the Board of Trade to some judicial tribunal. Subsection (3) refers to certain securities which the commissioners may or may not hold. The President of the Board of Trade saw the reason of cur arguments, and promised to inquire into it before Report. An hon. Member below the Gangway raised a further point. I want to ask the Minister of Mines if he will consult with the President to enable him to get the best men possible. I suggest that the whole of Sub-section (3) should be reconsidered and re-drafted before Report. The right hon. Gentleman remarked that there was little or no coal imported into this country. That is true, but I am informed by responsible people that even to-day, if they liked to do it for a narrow margin of profit, they could import foreign coal into the Thames cheaper than coal from Durham.

Mr. BATEY: But you would not do it.

Mr. SMITHERS: I would not do it, but there are thousands of people who would, and I am given to understand that big companies who are consumers of coal have asked for quotations—

The CHAIRMAN: I cannot see what this has to do with the constitution of the Commission.

Mr. SMITHERS: I am replying to a remark of the President of the Board of Trade himself. If I may finish the sentence, quotations are being obtained now, previous to the proposed passing of the Bill, for coal to be brought into the Thames for big consuming companies because they can get it cheaper. We are against this Clause as a whole because we believe compulsory organisation by the Government is bad for industry. If amalgamation cannot be come to voluntarily by those engaged in the industry, it had better be left alone altogether. In spite of interjections from people who come in for a few minutes and go out again, I have tried in my Amendments to do something to improve the Bill. I shall vote against the Clause because I am against the principle of compulsory amalgamation.

Mr. GRANVILLE GIBSON: I should not have interposed had it not been for what I consider an extraordinary statement by the President of the Board of Trade when referring to the payment of the Commissioners. First of all we are given to understand that these five commissioners are to be very eminent gentlemen in their calling, and secondly that they are to have payment but that the payment will not be large. Either they ought to be paid properly for doing the job or not at all. You could quite easily obtain almost as many men as you wished who would be glad to give their services if they were considered by the Board of Trade fitted for the job. In every walk of life we see men ungrudgingly give the best that is in them for the public good, but if these commissioners are to be paid at all, they should be paid a salary commensurate with the work they are doing.

If the right hon. Gentleman's intention is carried out, and they are only paid a comparatively small amount, probably sufficient for their travelling expenses, it means that only wealthy men can take on these jobs. Therefore, the President should not carry out his intention but should decide that these commissioners are either to be paid a salary commensurate with the work they have undertaken, or that it should be perfectly voluntary service.

The right hon. Gentleman gave us a list of some of the duties that they will carry out. They will be eminent gentlemen acceptable to all sections of the House, including an auditor, two who are mining engineers, and one who is a well-known lawyer. But Sub-section (5) says they shall have power to regulate their own procedure, and they may not carry out the intentions of the President of the Board of Trade. They may not carry out the work along the lines which he has indicated to the Committee to-night, because under Clause 5 they have the power to carry through their own method of procedure in their own way without any instructions from the President of the Board of Trade. I hope that the Secretary for Mines, if he is unable to deal with these points, will pass on my suggestion to the President of the Board of Trade that these commissioners should either be paid a proper salary for the job or that they should not be paid at all. If you only pay them a small amount of remuneration for what undoubtedly will be a very onerous task, it will mean that only those men possessed of considerable means will be able to take on a task of this description. I hope that note will be taken of my suggestion.

Mr. TURNER rose in his place, and claimed to move, "That the Question be now put."

Question put, "That the Question be now put."

The Committee divided: Ayes, 279; Noes, 114.

Division No. 180.]
AYES.
[8.39 p.m.


Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife, West)
Attlee, Clement Richard
Bennett, Captain E. N. (Cardiff, Central)


Adamson, W. M. (Stall., Cannock)
Ayles, Walter
Bennett, William (Battersea, South)


Addison, Rt. Hon. Dr. Christopher
Baker, John (Wolverhampton, Bilston)
Benson, G.


Aitchison, Rt. Hon. Craigle M.
Baldwin, Oliver (Dudley)
Bentham, Dr. Ethel


Alpass, J. H.
Batey, Joseph
Bevan, Aneurin (Ebbw Vale)


Amman, Charles George
Beckett, John (Camberwell, Peckham)
Birkett, W. Norman


Angell, Norman
Bellamy, Albert
Blindell, James


Aske, Sir Robert
Benn, Rt. Hon. Wedgwood
Bondfield, Rt. Hon. Margaret


Bowen, J. W.
Jenkins, W. (Glamorgan, Neath)
Quibell, D. J. K.


Bowerman, Rt. Hon. Charles W.
John, William (Rhondda, West)
Ramsay, T. B. Wilson


Broad, Francis Alfred
Johnston, Thomas
Raynes, W. R.


Brockway, A. Fenner
Jones, F. Llewellyn- (Flint)
Richards, R.


Bromfield, William
Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)
Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)


Bromley, J.
Jones, J. J. (West Ham, Silvertown)
Riley, Ben (Dewsbury)


Brooke, W.
Jones, Rt. Hon. Leif (Camborne)
Riley, F. F. (Stockton-on-Tees)


Brothers, M.
Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)
Ritson, J.


Brawn, C. W. E. (Notts, Mansfield)
Jowett, Rt. Hon. F. W.
Roberts, Rt. Hon. F. O. (W. Bromwich)


Brown, Ernest (Leith)
Kedward, R. M. (Kent, Ashford)
Romeril, H. G.


Brown, James (Ayr and Bute)
Kelly, W. T.
Rosbotham, D. S. T.


Buchanan, G.
Kennedy, Thomas
Rowson, Guy


Burgess, F. G.
Kinley, J.
Russell, Richard John (Eddisbury)


Burgin, Dr. E. L.
Kirkwood, D.
Salter, Dr. Alfred


Buxton, C. R. (Yorks. W. R. Elland)
Knight, Holford
Samuel, H. W. (Swansea, West)


Buxton, Rt. Hon. Noel (Norfolk, N.)
Lambert, Rt. Hon. George (S. Molton)
Sanders, W. S.


Calne, Derwent Hall-
Lang, Gordon
Sandham, E.


Cameron, A. G.
Lansbury, Rt. Hon. George
Sawyer, G. F.


Cape, Thomas
Law, Albert (Bolton)
Scott, James


Carter, W. (St. Pancras, S. W.)
Law, A. (Rosendale)
Scurr, John


Charleton, H. C.
Lawrence, Susan
Sexton, James


Chater, Daniel
Lawrie, Hugh Hartley (Stalybridge)
Shakespeare, Geoffrey H.


Clarke, J. S.
Lawther, W. (Barnard Castle)
Shaw, Rt. Hon. Thomas (Preston)


Cluse, W. S.
Leach, W.
Shepherd, Arthur Lewis


Clynes, Rt. Hon. John R.
Lee, Frank (Derby, N. E.)
Sherwood, G. H.


Cocks, Frederick Seymour
Lee, Jennie (Lanark, Northern)
Shield, George William


Compton, Joseph
Lees, J.
Shiels, Dr. Drummond


Cove, William G.
Lewis, T. (Southampton)
Shillaker, J. F


Daggar, George
Lloyd, C. Ellis
Shinwell, E.


Dallas, George
Longbottom, A. W.
Short, Alfred (Wednesbury)


Dalton, Hugh
Longden, F.
Simmons, C. J.


Davies, E. C. (Montgomery)
Lowth, Thomas
Sinclair, Sir A. (Caithness)


Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)
Macdonald, Gordon (Ince)
Sinkinson, George


Day, Harry
MacDonald, Rt. Hon. J. R. (Seaham)
Smith, Alfred (Sunderland)


Denman, Hon. R. D.
McElwee, A.
Smith, Ben (Bermondsey, Rotherhithe)


Dudgeon, Major C. R.
McEntee, V. L.
Smith, Frank (Nuneaton)


Dukes, C.
McKinlay, A.
Smith, H. B. Lees (Keighley)


Duncan, Charles
MacLaren, Andrew
Smith, Rennle (Penistone)


Ede, James Chuter
Maclean, Sir Donald (Cornwall, N.)
Smith, Tom (Pontefract)


Edmunds, J. E.
Maclean, Neil (Glasgow, Govan)
Smith, W. R. (Norwich)


Edwards, C. (Monmouth, Bedwellty)
MacNeill-Weir, L.
Snell, Harry


Edwards, E. (Morpeth)
McShane, John James
Snowden, Rt. Hon. Philip


Egan, W. H.
Melone, C. L'Estrange (N'thampton)
Snowden, Thomas (Accrington)


Evans, Capt. Ernest (Welsh Univer.)
Mander, Geoffrey le M.
Sorensen, R.


Foot, Isaac
Mansfield, W.
Stamford, Thomas W.


Freeman, Peter
March, S.
Stephen, Campbell


Gardner, B. W. (West Ham, Upton)
Marcus, M.
Stewart, J. (St. Rollox)


George, Major G. Lloyd (Pembroke)
Markham, S. F.
Strachey, E. J. St. Loe


Gibbins, Joseph
Marley, J.
Strauss, G. R.


Gibson, H. M. (Lancs. Mossley)
Marshall, Fred
Sullivan, J.


Gill, T. H.
Mathers, George
Sutton, J. E.


Gillett, George M.
Matters, L. W.
Taylor, R. A. (Lincoln)


Glassey, A. E.
Maxton, James
Taylor, W. B. (Norfolk, S. W.)


Gossling, A. G.
Melville, Sir James
Thomas, Rt. Hon J. H. (Derby)


Gould, F.
Messer, Fred
Thurtle, Ernest


Graham, D. M. (Lanark, Hamilton)
Millar, J. D.
Tinker, John Joseph


Graham, Rt. Hon. Wm. (Edin., Cent.)
Mills, J. E.
Tout, W. J.


Granville, E.
Milner, J.
Townend, A. E.


Gray, Milner
Montague, Frederick
Trevelyan, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles


Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)
Morgan, Dr. H. B.
Turner, B.


Griffith, F. Kingsley (Middlesbro' W.)
Morley, Ralph
Vaughan, D. J.


Griffiths, T. (Monmouth, Pontypool)
Morris, Rhys Hopkins
Viant, S. P.


Groves, Thomas E.
Morris-Jones, Dr. J. H. (Denbigh)
Walker, J.


Grundy, Thomas W.
Morrison, Herbert (Hackney, South)
Wallace, H. W.


Hall, F. (York, W. R., Normanton)
Morrison, Robert C. (Tottenham, N.)
Wallhead, Richard C.


Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)
Mort, D. L.
Watkins, F. C.


Hall, Capt. W. P. (Portsmouth, C.)
Moses, J. J. H.
Watson, W. M. (Dunfermline)


Hamilton, Mary Agnes (Blackburn)
Mosley, Lady C. (Stoke-on-Trent)
Wellock, Wilfred


Hamilton, Sir R. (Orkney & Zetland)
Mosley, Sir Oswald (Smethwick)
Welsh, James (Paisley)


Hardie, George D.
Muggeridge, H. T.
Welsh, James C. (Coatbridge)


Hartshorn, Rt. Hon. Vernon
Nathan, Major H. L.
West, F. R.


Hastings, Dr. Somerville
Noel Baker, P. J.
Westwood, Joseph


Haycock, A. W.
Oldfield, J. R.
Wheatley, Rt. Hon. J.


Hayday, Arthur
Oliver, George Harold (Ilkeston)
Whiteley, Wilfrid (Birm., Ladywood)


Hayes, John Henry
Oliver, P. M. (Man., Blackley)
Williams, David (Swansea, East)


Henderson, Arthur, Junr. (Cardiff, S.)
Owen, Major G. (Carnarvon)
Williams, Dr. J. H. (Llanelly)


Henderson, Thomas (Glasgow)
Palin, John Henry
Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)


Henderson, W. W. (Middx., Enfield)
Paling, Wilfrid
Wilson, C. H. (Sheffield, Attercliffe)


Herriotts, J.
Palmer, E. T.
Wilson, J. (Oldham)


Hirst, G. H. (York W. R. Wentworth)
Parkinson, John Allen (Wigan)
Wilson R. J. (Jarrow)


Hoffman, P. C.
Perry, S. F.
Winterton, G. E. (Leicester, Laughb'gh)


Hollins, A.
Pethick-Lawrenee, F. W.
Wright, W. (Rutherglen)


Hudson, James H. (Huddersfield)
Phillips, Dr. Marlon
Young, R. S. (Islington, North)


Hunter, Dr. Joseph
Picton-Turbervill, Edith



Hutchison, Maj.-Gen. Sir R.
Potts, John S.
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Isaacs, George
Price, M. P.
Mr. A. Barnes and Mr. Whiteley.




NOES.


Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel
Gibson, C. G. (Pudsey & Otley)
Peake, Capt. Osbert


Allen, W. E. D. (Belfast, W.)
Grace, John
Penny, Sir George


Ashley, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Wilfrid W.
Graham, Fergus (Cumberland, N.)
Peto, Sir Basil E. (Devon, Barnstaple)


Baldwin, Rt. Hon. Stanley (Bewdley)
Greene, W. P. Crawford
Ramsbotham, H.


Beamish, Rear-Admiral T. P. H.
Grenfell, Edward C. (City of London)
Reid, David D. (County Down)


Berry, Sir George
Gritten, W. G. Howard
Remer, John R.


Bevan, S. J. (Holborn)
Gunston, Captain D. W.
Rentoul, Sir Gervais S.


Birchall, Major Sir John Dearman
Hamilton, Sir George (Ilford)
Richardson, Sir P. W. (Sur'y, Ch'te'y)


Bird, Ernest Roy
Hanbury, C.
Roberts, Sir Samuel (Ecclesall)


Bourne, Captain Robert Croft
Harvey, Major S. E. (Devon, Totnes)
Rodd, Rt. Hon. Sir James Renneli


Bracken, B.
Heneage, Lieut.-Colonel Arthur P.
Salmon, Major I.


Braithwaite, Major A. N.
Hennessy, Major Sir G. R. J.
Samuel, Samuel (W'dsworth, Putney)


Brass, Captain Sir William
Hope, Sir Harry (Forfar)
Simms, Major-General J.


Brown, Col. D. C. (N'th'l'd., Hexham)
Howard-Bury, Colonel C. K.
Sinclair, Col. T. (Queen's U., Belfast)


Carver, Major W. H.
Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hackney, N.)
Skelton, A. N.


Castle Stewart, Earl of
Hurd, Percy A.
Smith, Louis W. (Sheffield, Hallam)


Cautley, Sir Henry S.
Hurst, Sir Gerald B.
Smith-Carington, Neville W.


Chadwick, Sir Robert Burton
Iveagh, Countess of
Smithers, Waldron


Christle, J. A.
James, Lieut.-Colonel Hon. Cuthbert
Somerset, Thomas


Colville, Major D. J.
King, Commodore Rt. Hon. Henry D.
Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)


Courtauld, Major J. S.
Knox, Sir Alfred
Southby, Commander A. R. J.


Croom-Johnson, R. P.
Lamb, Sir J. Q.
Stanley, Maj. Hon. O. (W'morland)


Culverwell, C. T. (Bristol, West)
Lane Fox, Col. Rt. Hon. George R.
Steel-Maitland, Rt. Hon. Sir Arthur


Cunliffe-Lister, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip
Llewellin, Major J. J.
Thomson, Sir F.


Davidson, Rt. Hon. J. (Hertford)
McConnell, Sir Joseph
Todd, Capt. A. J.


Davidson, Major-General Sir J. H.
MacRobert, Rt. Hon. Alexander M.
Train, J.


Davies, Dr. Vernon
Maitland, A. (Kent, Faversham)
Turton, Robert Hugh


Davies, Maj. Geo. F. (Somerset, Yeovil)
Makins, Brigadier-General E.
Vaughan-Morgan, Sir Kenyon


Dixey, A. C.
Margesson, Captain H. D.
Ward, Lieut.-Col. Sir A. Lambert


Edmondson, Major A. J.
Meller, R. J.
Warrender, Sir Victor


Erskine, Lord (Somerset, Weston-s. M.)
Merriman, Sir F. Boyd
Waterhouse, Captain Charles


Everard, W. Lindsay
Mitchell, Sir W. Lane (Streatham)
Wells, Sydney R.


Falle, Sir Bertram G.
Mond, Hon. Henry
Wilson, G. H. A. (Cambridge U.)


Fielden, E. B.
Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. Sir B.
Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George


Ford, Sir P. J.
Morrison, W. S. (Glos., Cirencester)
Withers, Sir John James


Forestier-Walker, Sir L.
Muirhead, A. J.
Womersley, W. J.


Fremantle, Lieut.-Colonel Francis E.
Nield, Rt. Hon. Sir Herbert



Galbraith, J. F. W.
Oman, Sir Charles William C.
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Gault, Lieut.-Col. Andrew Hamilton
O'Neill, Sir H.
Captain Sir George Bowyer and




Captain Wallace.

Question put accordingly, "That the Clause, as amended, be added to the Bill."

The Committee divided: Ayes, 284; Noes, 121.

Division No. 181.]
AYES.
[8.48 p.m.


Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife, West)
Buchanan, G.
Freeman, Peter


Adamson, W. M. (Staff, Cannock)
Burgess, F. G.
Gardner, B. W. (West Ham, Upton)


Addison, Rt. Hon. Dr. Christopher
Burgin, Dr. E. L.
George, Major G. Lloyd (Pembroke)


Aitchison, Rt. Hon. Craigle M.
Buxton, C. R. (Yorks. W. R. Elland)
Gibbins, Joseph


Alpass, J. H.
Buxton, Rt. Hon. Noel (Norfolk, N.)
Gibson, H. M. (Lanes. Mossley)


Ammon, Charles George
Calne, Derwent Hall-
Gill, T. H.


Angell, Norman
Cameron, A. G.
Gillett, George M.


Aske, Sir Robert
Cape, Thomas
Glassey, A. E.


Attlee, Clement Richard
Carter, W. (St. Pancras, S. W.)
Gossling, A. G.


Ayles, Walter
Charleton, H. C.
Gould, F.


Baker, John (Wolverhampton, Bilston)
Chater, Daniel
Graham, D. M. (Lanark, Hamilton)


Baldwin, Oliver (Dudley)
Church, Major A. G.
Graham, Rt. Hon. Wm. (Edin., Cent.)


Batey, Joseph
Clarke, J. S.
Granville, E.


Beckett, John (Camberwell, Peckham)
Cluse, W. S.
Gray, Milner


Bellamy, Albert
Clynes, Rt. Hon. John R.
Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)


Benn, Rt. Hon. Wedgwood
Cocks, Frederick Seymour
Griffth, F. Kingsley (Middlesbro' W.)


Bennett, Captain E. N. (Cardiff, Central)
Compton, Joseph
Griffiths, T. (Monmouth, Pontypool)


Bennett, William (Battersea, South)
Cove, William G.
Groves, Thomas E.


Benson, G.
Daggar, George
Grundy, Thomas W.


Bentham, Dr. Ethel
Dallas, George
Hall, F. (York, W. R., Normanton)


Bevan, Aneurin (Ebbw Vale)
Dalton, Hugh
Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)


Birkett, W. Norman
Davies, E. C. (Montgomery)
Hall, Capt. W. P. (Portsmouth, C.)


Blindell, James
Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)
Hamilton, Mary Agnes (Blackburn)


Bondfield, Rt. Hon. Margaret
Day, Harry
Hamilton, Sir R. (Orkney & Zetland)


Bowen, J. W.
Denman, Hon. R. D.
Hardie, George D.


Bowerman, Rt. Hon. Charles W.
Dudgeon, Major C. R.
Hartshorn, Rt. Hon. Vernon


Broad, Francis Alfred
Dukes, C.
Hastings, Dr. Somerville


Brockway, A. Fenner
Duncan, Charles
Haycock, A. W.


Bromfield, William
Ede, James Chuter
Hayday, Arthur


Bromley, J.
Edmunds, J. E.
Hayes, John Henry


Brooke, W.
Edwards, C. (Monmouth, Bedwellty)
Henderson, Arthur, Junr. (Cardiff, S.)


Brothers, M.
Edwards, E. (Morpeth)
Henderson, Thomas (Glasgow)


Brown, C. W. E. (Notts. Mansfield)
Egan, W. H.
Henderson, W. W. (Middx., Enfield)


Brown, Ernest (Leith)
Evans, Capt. Ernest (Welsh Univ.)
Herriotts, J.


Brawn, James (Ayr and Bute)
Foot, Isaac
Hirst, G. H. (York, W. R., Wentworth)


Hoffman, P. C.
Messer, Fred
Shillaker, J. F.


Hollins, A.
Millar, J. D.
Shinwell, E.


Horrabin, J. F.
Mills, J. E.
Short, Alfred (Wednesbury)


Hudson, James H. (Huddersfield)
Milner, J.
Simmons, C. J.


Hunter, Dr. Joseph
Montague, Frederick
Sinclair, Sir A. (Caithness)


Hutchison, Maj.-Gen. Sir R.
Morgan, Dr. H. B.
Sinkinson, George


Isaacs, George
Morley, Ralph
Smith, Alfred (Sunderland)


Jenkins, W. (Glamorgan, Neath)
Morris, Rhys Hopkins
Smith, Ben (Bermondsey, Rotherhithe)


John, William (Rhondda, West)
Morris-Jones, Dr. J. H. (Denbigh)
Smith, Frank (Nuneaton)


Johnston, Thomas
Morrison, Herbert (Hackney, South)
Smith, H. B. Lees (Keighley)


Jones, F. Llewellyn- (Flint)
Morrison, Robert C. (Tottenham, N.)
Smith, Rennle (Penistone)


Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)
Mort, D. L.
Smith, Tom (Pontefract)


Jones, J. J. (West Ham, Silvertown)
Moses, J. J. H.
Smith, W. R. (Norwich)


Jones, Rt. Hon. Leif (Camborne)
Mosley, Lady C. (Stoke-on-Trent)
Snell, Harry


Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)
Mosley, Sir Oswald (Smethwick)
Snowden, Rt. Hon. Philip


Jowett, Rt. Hon. F. W.
Muggeridge, H. T.
Snowden, Thomas (Accrington)


Kedward, R. M. (Kent, Ashford)
Nathan, Major H. L.
Sorensen, R.


Kelly, W. T.
Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter)
Stamford, Thomas W.


Kennedy, Thomas
Noel Baker, P. J.
Stephen, Campbell


Kinley, J.
Oldfield, J. R.
Stewart, J. (St. Rollox)


Kirkwood, D.
Oliver, George Harold (Ilkeston)
Strachey, E. J. St. Loe


Knight, Holford
Oliver, P. M. (Man, Blackley)
Strauss, G. R.


Lambert, Rt. Hon. George (S. Molton)
Owen, Major G. (Carnarvon)
Sullivan, J.


Lang, Gordon
Owen, H. F. (Hereford)
Sutton, J. E.


Lansbury, Rt. Hon. George
Palin, John Henry
Taylor, R. A. (Lincoln)


Law, Albert (Bolton)
Paling, Wilfrid
Taylor, W. B. (Norfolk, S. W.)


Law, A. (Rosendale)
Palmer, E. T.
Thomas, Rt. Hon. J. H. (Derby)


Lawrence, Susan
Parkinson, John Allen (Wigan)
Thurtle, Ernest


Lawrie, Hugh Hartley (Stalybridge)
Perry, S. F.
Tinker, John Joseph


Lawther, W. (Barnard Castle)
Pethick-Lawrence, F. W.
Tout, W. J.


Leach, W.
Phillips, Dr. Marlon
Townend, A. E.


Lee, Frank (Derby, N. E.)
Picton-Turbervill, Edith
Trevelyan, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles


Lee, Jennie (Lanark, Northern)
Potts, John S.
Turner, B.


Lees, J.
Price, M. P.
Vaughan, D. J.


Lewis, T. (Southampton)
Quibell, D. J. K.
Viant, S. P.


Lloyd, C. Ellis
Ramsay, T. B. Wilson
Walker, J.


Longbottom, A. W.
Raynes, W. R.
Wallace, H. W.


Longden, F.
Richards, R.
Wallhead, Richard C.


Lowth, Thomas
Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)
Watkins, F. C.


Macdonald, Gordon (Ince)
Riley, Ben (Dewsbury)
Watson, W. M. (Dunfermline)


MacDonald, Rt. Hon. J. R. (Seaham)
Riley, F. F. (Stockton-on-Tees)
Wellock, Wilfred


McElwee, A.
Ritson, J.
Welsh, James (Paisley)


McEntee, V. L.
Roberts, Rt. Hon. F. O. (W. Bromwich)
Welsh, James C. (Coatbridge)


McKinlay, A.
Romeril, H. G.
West, F. R.


MacLaren, Andrew
Rosbotham, D. S. T.
Westwood, Joseph


Maclean, Sir Donald (Cornwall, N.)
Rowson, Guy
Wheatley, Rt. Hon. J.


Maclean, Neil (Glasgow, Govan)
Russell, Richard John (Eddlsbury)
Whiteley, Wilfrid (Birm., Ladywood)


MacNeill-Weir, L.
Salter, Dr. Alfred
Wilkinson, Ellen C.


McShane, John James
Samuel, H. W. (Swansea, West)
Williams, David (Swansea, East)


M alone, C. L'Estrange (N'thampton)
Sanders, W. S.
Williams, Dr. J. H. (Llanelly)


Mander, Geoffrey le M.
Sandham, E.
Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)


Mansfield, W.
Sawyer, G. F.
Wilson, C. H. (Sheffield, Attercliffe)


March, S.
Scott, James
Wilson, J. (Oldham)


Marcus, M.
Scurr, John
Wilson, R. J. (Jarrow)


Markham, S. F.
Sexton, James
Winterton, G. E. (Leicester, Loughb'gh)


Marley, J.
Shakespeare, Geoffrey H.
Wright, W. (Rutherglen)


Marshall, F.
Shaw, Rt. Hon. Thomas (Preston)
Young, R. S. (Islington, North)


Mathers, George
Shepherd, Arthur Lewis



Matters, L. W.
Sherwood, G. H.
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Maxton, James
Shield, George William
Mr. A. Barnes and Mr. Whiteley.


Melville, Sir James
Shiels, Dr. Drummond



NOES.


Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel
Colville, Major D. J.
Gault, Lieut.-Col. Andrew Hamilton


Alien, W. E. D. (Belfast, W.)
Courtauld, Major J. S.
Gibson, C. G, (Pudsey & Otley)


Ashley, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Wilfrid W.
Croom-Johnson, R. P.
Grace, John


Baldwin, Rt. Hon. Stanley (Bewdley)
Culverwell, C. T. (Bristol, West)
Graham, Fergus (Cumberland, N.)


Beamish, Rear-Admiral T. P. H.
Cunliffe-Lister, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip
Greene, W. P. Crawford


Berry, Sir George
Davidson, Rt. Hon. J. (Hertford)
Grenfell, Edward C. (City of London)


Bevan, S. J. (Holborn)
Davidson, Major-General Sir J. H.
Gritten, W. G. Howard


Birchall, Major Sir John Dearman
Davies, Dr. Vernon
Gunston, Captain D. W.


Bird, Ernest Roy
Davies, Maj. Geo. F. (Somerset, Yeovil)
Hamilton, Sir George (Ilford)


Bourne, Captain Robert Croft
Dixey, A. C.
Hanbury, C.


Boyce, H. L.
Edmondson, Major A. J.
Harvey, Major S. E. (Devon, Totnes)


Bracken, B.
Erskine, Lord (Somerset, Weston-s.-M.)
Heneage, Lieut.-Colonel Arthur P.


Braithwaite, Major A. N.
Everard, W. Lindsay
Hennessy, Major Sir G. R. J.


Brass, Captain Sir William
Falle, Sir Bertram G.
Hope, Sir Harry (Forfar)


Brown, Col. D. C. (N'th'l'd., Hexham)
Ferguson, Sir John
Howard-Bury, Colonel C. K.


Carver, Major W. H.
Fielden, E. B.
Hudson, Capt. A U. M. (Hackney, N.)


Castle Stewart, Earl of
Ford, Sir P. J.
Hurd, Percy A.


Cautley, Sir Henry S.
Forestier-Walker, Sir L.
Hurst, Sir Gerald B.


Chadwick, Sir Robert Burton
Fremantle, Lieut.-Colonel Francis E.
Iveagh, Countess of


Christle, J. A.
Galbraith, J. F. W.
James, Lieut.-Colonel Hon. Cuthbert




King, Commodore Rt. Hon. Henry D.
Penny, Sir George
Stanley, Maj, Hon. O. (W'morland)


Knox, Sir Alfred
Peto, Sir Basil E. (Devon, Barnstaple)
Steel-Maitland, Rt. Hon. Sir Arthur


Lamb, Sir J. Q.
Ramsbotham, H.
Thomson, Sir F.


Lane Fox, Col. Rt. Hon. George R.
Reid, David D. (County Down)
Todd, Capt. A. J.


Llewellin, Major J. J.
Remer, John R.
Train, J.


McConnell, Sir Joseph
Rentoul, Sir Gervais S.
Turton, Robert Hugh


MacRobert, Rt. Hon. Alexander M.
Richardson, Sir P. W. (Sur'y, Ch'ts'y)
Vaughan-Morgan, Sir Kenyon


Maitland, A. (Kent, Faversham)
Roberts, Sir Samuel (Ecclesall)
Wallace, Capt. D. E. (Hornsey)


Makins, Brigadier-General E.
Rodd, Rt. Hon. Sir James Rennell
Ward, Lieut.-Col. Sir A. Lambert


Margesson, Captain H. D.
Salmon, Major I.
Wardlaw-Milne, J. S.


Mason, Colonel Glyn K.
Samuel, Samuel (W'dsworth, Putney)
Waterhouse, Captain Charles


Meller, R. J.
Sandeman, Sir N. Stewart
Wells, Sydney R.


Merriman, Sir F. Boyd
Savery, S. S.
Williams, Charles (Devon, Torquay)


Mitchell, Sir W. Lane (Streatham)
Simms, Major-General J.
Wilson, G. H. A. (Cambridge U.)


Mond, Hon. Henry
Sinclair, Col. T. (Queen's U., Belfast)
Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George


Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. Sir B.
Skelton, A. N.
Withers, Sir John James


Morrison, W. S. (Glos., Cirencester)
Smith, Louis W. (Sheffield, Hallam)
Womersley, W. J.


Muirhead, A. J.
Smith-Carington, Neville W.



Nield, Rt. Hon. Sir Herbert
Smithers, Waldron
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Oman, Sir Charles William C.
Somerset, Thomas
Captain Sir George Bowyer and


O'Neill, Sir H.
Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)
Sir Victor Warrender.


Peake, Captain Osbert
Southby, Commander A. R. J.



Question put, and agreed to.

NEW CLAUSE.—(General Functions of Coal Mines Reorganisation Commission.)

(1) It shall be the duty of the Coal Mines Reorganisation Commission (hereafter in this section referred to as "the Commission") to further the reorganisation of the coal mining industry with a view to facilitating the production, supply, and sale of coal by owners of coal mines, and for that purpose to promote and assist, by the preparation of schemes and otherwise, the amalgamation of undertakings consisting of or comprising coal mines where such amalgamations appear to the commission to be in the national interest.

(2) The Commission may hold such inquiries as they consider necessary or desirable for the discharge of their functions under this Act, and, in respect of any meeting of the Commission at which a quorum of the commissioners is present for the purpose of any such inquiry, the Tribunals of Inquiry (Evidence) Act, 1921, shall apply to the Commission as if it were a tribunal established in manner provided by that Act and as if that Act had been applied thereto in the manner thereby provided.

(3) The Commission may from time to time employ such technical and professional agents as they consider necessary or desirable for the discharge of their functions under this Act, and, subject as hereinafter provided, there shall be paid by the Board of Trade such remuneration to the agents so employed as the Board may, with the approval of the Treasury, determine, and the expenses of the Board under this Subsection shall be defrayed out of moneys provided by Parliament:

Provided that a sum equal to the amount of any expenses incurred by the employment of such agents as aforesaid for the purpose of promoting or assisting the amalgamation of any undertakings shall, in the event of the undertakings being amalgamated, be repaid to the Board by the owners of the amalgamated undertaking.—[Mr. Turner.]

Brought up, and read the First time.

Mr. TURNER: I beg to move, "That the Clause be read a Second time."

Commodore KING: In accordance with the agreement come to on the general discussion, we do not propose to make any remarks on the Motion for the Second Heading of this Clause.

Clause read a Second time.

Commodore KING: I beg to move, as an Amendment to the proposed Clause, in line 1, at the beginning, to insert the words
Upon representation being made to them by any coalowner in a district.
We have now reached a stage where the five commissioners have been set up. They started by being three, but have been increased to five, and now we have to discuss the details of their functions. They are to be set up to go into the question of the reorganisation of the coal industry with a view of promoting and preparing schemes of amalgamation, as they think fit. They are to have power not merely to consider schemes of amalgamation which willing persons may wish to set up, but amalgamations where several people may wish to bring in others to form what they consider from a business point of view a good amalgamation. They are to have the power of putting forward schemes whether any coalowners in the district desire amalgamation or not. That is a novel and very undesirable precedent, and that is why we propose to insert the words "upon representation being made to them by any coalowner in a district." The meaning of the Amendment is perfectly clear. We wish to prevent schemes being brought forward where every single owner in a district is opposed to amalgamation.

Mr. BATEY: It was in your 1926 Bill.

Commodore KING: No. This Clause will allow the commissioners to bring in a scheme of amalgamation in a district where everybody is unwilling to enter. That is what we are trying to prevent.

Mr. BATEY: The words were used in your Bill of 1926.

9.0 p.m.

Commodore KING: The hon. Member always wishes to be courteous and correct, and he will find that the actual words of my Amendment are in the 1926 Act, but that cannot be any objection to their being inserted in this proposed new Clause. Hon. Members opposite on several occasions have said that the words we have criticised are contained in the Act of 1926. If they claim words in the 1926 Act as a useful precedent surely we, who were the authors of that Act, are not to blame when we adopt words from that Act. We considered that a certain amount of compulsion might be necessary and desirable under certain circumstances, but we never visualised then the position, and we strongly oppose it now, of compulsion in a case where everybody is unwilling. I dislike compulsion in any form and especially when people are wholly antagonistic on business grounds to a scheme of amalgamation. They may be working a mine which is yielding a different kind of coal to another mine in the same district, and it may be that the mine is quite unfitted to be amalgamated. I do not wish to delay the Committee in going through all the financial details and arguments which have been used before, but we must realise that from the financial point of view there are great difficulties in bringing about compulsory amalgamation when no one is willing.
In the case of those who opposed what are described as absorption schemes under the Act of 1926, a provision was made for them to be compensated or bought out. That cannot possibly be done under this Bill. If everyone who is to be amalgamated is unwilling there is no central fund from which they can be compensated and, therefore, it is most undesirable that we should have these wholesale compulsions on people who are not willing to enter. In the interests of fair play we demand that at least one owner should be found in a district who is willing to ask the commissioners to go
into the matter. We have to realise that the coal industry is run, as it has been run for many hundreds of years, by business men who have grown up in that industry. [Interruption.] The hon. Members who interrupt me consider, I am sure, that they know a great deal about the industry because they have been brought up in it, and have spent years working in it. When I was Secretary for Mines I found that they thought they knew more about it than I did. I did not agree with them, because I was in the fortunate position of being able to glean information and knowledge from all sources and after I had been in the Department for about three months I was usually able to hold my own, even against some hon. Gentlemen who had spent years in the industry. But I must not be drawn away from the Amendment by the interruptions of hon. Members opposite. All I will say is that when they claim that because they have spent many years in the industry they know a great deal about it, then in order to be consistent and logical they must admit that owners whose families have been concerned with coal mines for generations must know at least something about their work.
Of course, owners wish to improve their property and to make profits, but hon. Members opposite might pay the owners the compliment of admitting that they would know whether it was a good thing or not for pits to be amalgamated in a certain neighbourhood. As hon. Members are aware the management of a pit in a district always know a great deal about what is going on in the neighbouring pits. They make it their business to know what developments are taking place, what profits or losses are being made and what is the financial position of other pits. These cute business men who have to make their living out of the industry, with probably the whole of their capital, probably the whole of their interest in this country sunk in a pit, know that it is to their advantage to make the largest amount possible out of it. Men in that position, who have been managing pits for years are in the best position to judge whether amalgamation will be to their good or not. Although hon. Members criticise owners in various districts I think they will admit that there must be at least one if not more of the owners in any particular district with sufficient
business ability and common sense and knowledge of the surrounding circumstances to say whether it is desirable or not to have amalgamations there.
If at least one owner cannot be found in an area who is willing to ask the commissioners to propound a scheme, then any scheme which the Commission seeks to apply to such a district would, it seems to me, be foredoomed. I am aware that there are a certain number of cases in which perhaps amalgamations have been held up; we know that there may be people who have been working alongside each other in the same district for years, and one man may think it desirable to have amalgamation with another man but may not be able to bring it about. He has the power, as we recognise in the 1926 Act to bring the matter before the Railway and Canal Commission, but it may be that ho does not like to bring any force or compulsion to bear on a friend. I agree that in such cases some interference on the part of the Board of Trade or of a Commission like this might be useful. But to try to compel people who have dissimilar interests and who, from their own knowledge of the industry, consider that amalgamation would not be to their advantage, would be perfectly absurd. I think most people would agree with that view and if so, they must agree that this Amendment is a fair and proper one.
The right hon. Gentleman has told us that the members of the Commission are to be carefully chosen and are to be the best men available, but, even so, they cannot possibly have the local knowledge possessed by the individuals in a district and if they cannot find one person who is willing to request a scheme, I do not believe that any scheme brought forward by them could be worked successfully. It is impossible to make unwilling workers carry on amicably and successfully together. There must be a certain amount of consent and the idea of forcing people to do things which they have no wish to do, is foreign to the British character. We have been reminded continually in connection with the trade unions that compulsion is foreign to our nature and thank Heavens, the Britisher does not like to be compelled to do anything.

Mr. KIRKWOOD: You forced an eight hour day on the miners!

Commodore KING: Oh, no.

The CHAIRMAN: The only compulsion which we are dealing with now is the compulsion mentioned in this Clause.

Commodore KING: It was that compulsion with which I was dealing but I have been led away. I am trying to put the case as clearly and as fairly as I can. If hon. Members opposite interrupt me and if I am drawn aside by their interruptions, I must apologise. I have tried to make plain the meaning of the Amendment. I think that wholesale and complete compulsion is foreign to our nature and that no scheme can be of any value if there is not at least one person in the district concerned who is willing to ask that such a scheme should be put into force.

Major G. DAVIES: As one who has some experience of amalgamations in connection with other industries, I wish to reinforce what has been said by the hon. and gallant Gentleman who moved this Amendment. After all, our great objective is to try to bring prosperity to workers and owners alike, because they are both essential to the industry and the country. Anyone who has taken part in industry knows that prosperity depends very much on the smooth running of the different parts of that industry and smooth working as between the individuals who are responsible for the direction of the industry. The right hon. Gentleman the Member for Hillhead (Sir R. Horne) in a remarkable speech likened this proposal to an attempt at unequally yoking in matrimony people who did not wish to be so yoked. It is precisely against that particular function that we protest in this Amendment.
Anyone who has had any experience of the direction of industry knows how important it is to have colleagues in whom you have complete confidence, and whose general attitude towards the industry you share. You require to know, also, how close to the wind their ethical principles allow them to sail, because that is often an important consideration. Here we contemplate the setting up of a very able Board of five people, who are to go round and not only decide in the interests of how the coal industry should be run, whether as large centralised undertakings or as a number of small ones, but who
are going to be clothed with a dictatorial power, saying that A, B, and C have got to sit together on a board of directors and run an industry profitably for themselves and efficiently for their workpeople. It seems to me that anyone who has had close experience of industry knows that this is simply asking for trouble. We feel that we must at every possible opportunity protest against this proposal, and that we should leave no stone unturned to oppose it.
Is not the right hon. Gentleman the President of the Board of Trade prepared to accept the Amendment? After all, it does not contemplate that those concerned in a district should be unanimous, or even that there should be a majority, but it brings it down to one individual who thinks an amalgamation would be a good idea. There are undoubtedly cases where the majority of people think some form of rationalisation or amalgamation would be desirable, and where one individual, for possibly unworthy motives, stands out. I think both sides are agreed that under such conditions it is well to bring forward some measure possibly of compulsion; but here you may be faced with a situation in which every single person of experience in the direction of these businesses is opposed, and it seems we are to have five pundits selected, who have a greater knowledge than the right hon. Gentleman, than the Socialist party, if that be possible, than the House of Commons, and than those who have spent their lives in the industry, and who will come and say "Thou shalt."
If we intend those amalgamations to achieve any success, we must have a little more business foresight than that. As I say, I have had a great deal of experience of amalgamations, which have been brought about, not by Government intervention, but by the pure logic of economic laws. We have got to a point that is now called rationalisation. In my time, when I was actively connected with industry, it was not called by such a high-falutin name. We know that the whole question of reorganisation is in the air at the present time, that there is a psychology towards thinking of it along the line of attacking the trade depression and unemployment—

The CHAIRMAN: This is really a Second Reading speech.

Major DAVIES: I will try to keep within your Ruling. The reason we press this Amendment is because we do not believe that the work of these commissioners will be helped, but rather that it will be hampered, unless there is a provision that some at least of those immediately concerned who are going to be dictated to, in what has hitherto been regarded as entirely a question for themselves, should coincide with the idea that amalgamation and so forth would be desirable. I cannot help thinking it would be of assistance if the President accepted the Amendment, and if his heart is soft, and not, like Pharaoh's, hard—Pharaoh was a very hard-hearted and stiff-necked man—I am sure the right hon. Gentleman will give due weight to the position which we are putting before him. I am convinced, from my own experience, that if we are going to put into operation a Measure which gives these tremendously autocratic powers, and if we are going to breed antagonism instead of co-operation, this Bill will be a failure instead of a success.

Mr. HARDIE: When the late Secretary for Mines spoke about the men who have been in this business for hundreds of years, and when he spoke about the knowledge that he gained when he was Secretary for Mines, he seems to have forgotten one thing. If he had known the history of those hundreds of years, about the general incapacity coming from the inefficiency of those calling themselves owners, he would have understood in a large measure the difficulties that make the mining question what it is to-day. The fact that the nation never realised its wealth in coal and never placed the coal question, not upon a selling price, not upon how you are getting coal out of the earth, but on the natural condition of the strata, which produces all the difficulties in mining—

The CHAIRMAN: This also is a Second Reading speech, and the hon. Member is getting too far from the Amendment.

Mr. HARDIE: The Amendment means having something other than compulsion, and I am trying to show that without compulsion the coal trade has got into its present state. The reason we require
compulsion is because of what I have been stating. Unless we get compulsion, the present conditions will obtain. In a disturbed mining area, you find coal costing 1s. or 1s. 6d. more a ton to bring to the surface than in an area that is not disturbed by a natural fault, but the coal is always selling at the same price. We have been told about A, B and C, and about getting together. The A B C of mining is understanding the difficulties of the question, and compulsion is absolutely necessary if we are going to get the national asset of coal brought to the surface—

The CHAIRMAN: This compulsion refers to the Commission having the power to make schemes for amalgamation, and the hon. Member must keep to that.

Mr. HARDIE: I am keeping to that as closely as I can. Unless I am allowed to discuss how coal is brought to the surface, I cannot see how I can discuss the question, because we are dealing with a form of compulsion. Tie Amendment reads:
Upon representation being made to them by any coal owner in a district.
That means that there is to be amalgamation only if the owners ask for it.

Commodore KING: No, only one owner.

Mr. HARDIE: That is what I mean. It is evident from the way the industry has been going on up to the present that with these conditions obtaining, when you get a natural differential and there is no relation to that, then this nation must have compulsion, not only for the present but in order to meet future needs. Unless we get compulsion it means that the same system will continue as at present, and the cutting out of all the valuable schemes in order to make money quickly for the owners.

The CHAIRMAN: The hon. Member must remember that in dealing with this matter we are confined to the Amendments on the Paper and the Amendments to which they refer. This Amendment deals merely with the production of schemes for amalgamation, and he must confine himself to the question of powers of compulsion for schemes in the hands of the Commission.

Mr. HARDIE: That is contained in all I have said. I have been trying to show the horrible mess into which the trade has fallen up to the present, and we are trying to find a way out. I am replying to the ex-Secretary for Mines who was arguing that nothing could be improved because these men had been connected with the industry for generations and he claimed that they were bound to have some knowledge of it. I ask any competent person, taking the strata of Britain, which is the finest coalfield in the world, whether there is evidence that something has been learned by their being connected with the coalfields or that they have applied the knowledge to the needs of the industry? The whole morass to-day is based on the fact that they do not understand the science of mining. The need for this Clause is shown by the fact that even though you are to-day in Britain supposed to be at the apex as far as the application of science to industry is concerned, you are under the present system still to allow the owners to work contrary to each other in the same coalfield. I hope that the Committee will see the absolute necessity for compulsion as far as the coalfields are concerned.

Major NATHAN: I rise, not for the purpose of discussing the merits or defects of amalgamations—that has already been discussed in the general Debate—nor for the purpose of discussing the question of the value or otherwise of compulsion in amalgamation, because that will arise on later Amendments. My object can be fulfilled in a very few words, and it is to point out the effect of this Amendment if passed. It will simply be to restore the position to what it would be if this Bill never became law at all. The late Secretary for Mines, in putting the Amendment before the Committee, suggested that it was desirable that the initiative should come from at least one owner of a mine before the Coal Mines Re-organisation Committee should intervene at all, but that was precisely the position under the Mining Industry Act, 1926, which provided, in terms, that where an owner of any undertaking considered it expedient to amalgamate with other owners who were unwilling to agree to amalgamation, then the owner who wished to take the initiative might lay his proposal before the Board of Trade and the
Board of Trade, in its turn, if satisfied that the scheme was prima facie desirable, would submit it to the Railway and Canal Commission, which was then to adjudicate upon it.
If the words in the Amendment now proposed be inserted, it will be reverting to a position which is precisely the same as under the Act of 1926, and the whole objective of constituting this Commission will have disappeared. If it be—and it is difficult to credit it in view of the state of the industry—that the object of hon. Members above the Gangway is to sabotage all the proposals which are put forward by the Government for the purpose of dealing with the serious situation in the industry, then this Amendment is a weapon apt for the purpose; but I can scarcely credit it, having regard to the state of the mining industry in general and to the lamentable position of the coal industry in particular, that hon. Gentlemen will have so little regard for the necessities of the situation as to press upon this Committee a Clause which simply means we are to be content with things as they are, bad as they are.

Sir SAMUEL ROBERTS: I have risen only to make one point, and it arises out of the decision which was given by the Deputy-Chairman this afternoon, that we were not able, under the Rules of Order, to deal with the question of costs on unsuccessful applications to the Railway and Canal Commission. The result is that this Commission, without a request from a single coalowner, can take five or six firms, totally against the will of anyone, before the Railway and Canal Commission and put them to enormous expense, because appearance before the Commission is very, very costly, as those who have experienced it know. Very possibly, if there is not a coalowner who agrees, the Railway and Canal Commission, being sensible men, will turn down the application, and that will mean putting the owners to tremendous expense. Under this Ruling they will not be allowed to be awarded costs. We cannot discuss the award of costs, and it is all the more important that we should see that no impossible schemes are taken up, as the commissioners know they cannot be made to pay costs and have no responsibility. Surely they should have some responsi-
bility and should have one coalowner, at least, behind them before they cause this burden to industry.

Sir BASIL PETO: The hon. and gallant Member for North-East Bethnal Green (Major Nathan) seemed to question the authority of the Chair in having admitted this Amendment as being in order because he attempted to prove that it was a direct negative of the whole Clause, and, therefore, out of order. I would like to point out that it is nothing of the kind and that the Clause sets up an entirely new method of procedure and deals with very many other things not contemplated or dealt with under the Act of 1926. What is the purpose of the Clause? It is, presumably, to assist the industry by promoting amalgamation, and that is what it says. The whole purpose of this Amendment is that before the Commission takes action they should at least be informed, not as the hon. Member for Springburn (Mr. Hardie) suggests that the coalowners in the district desire amalgamation, but that there is one coalowner in the district who thinks it to the advantage of cheap production of coal, or the development of the industry, or other reasons, that the amalgamation should take place.
With a proposition of such elementary common sense and justice, particularly coupled with what my hon. Friend the Member for Ecclesall (Sir S. Roberts) has just said, I cannot understand the Secretary for Mines having the slightest hesitation in accepting the Amendment. It does not in any way attempt to restore the position as it was under the Act of 1926, but it recognises that before putting this gigantic machinery into force we should have but the slightest guarantee of the opinion of those who are, after all, best able to decide what is in the interest of their own industry, and that we should have the opinion of at least one of the coalowners that a proposal of the commissioners is in favour of the production of cheap coal and the improvement of the condition of the industry. On that depends what the hon. Member for Springburn and other hon. Members opposite have at heart, namely, the maintenance of the standard of living of the colliery workers. It seems to me almost incredible that the Government should have hesitated for a moment to accept
this simple Amendment to give the necessary power for ascertaining whether one owner of a colliery, whom you propose compulsorily to amalgamate, is of the opinion that the amlagamation is in the interest of the industry in the district.
It seems so simple a proposition, that I wonder that we have spent so long in discussing it, but the spirit of the Debate was imported into it by the speech of the hon. Member for Springburn, which was delivered, no doubt, with the intention of facilitating the passage of the Bill, but which will, perhaps, have the opposite effect. There is a sort of party point of view that the coal owner must always be wrong, and must never know anything about his business, and that therefore the opinion of a single coal owner as to this important machinery being set into operation must necessarily be wrong. While keeping within the narrow limits which the Chairman has ruled for this Amendment, I think that I am entitled to ask the Committee to consider the question whether they will really facilitate what I term cheaper production of coal and the prosperity of the industry by the scheme of compulsory amalgamation applied to coalfields without taking the opinion of a single owner of a colliery. Coal production is in a totally different position to any other business. In the case of a factory or a business of ordinary industrial production, it would be quite unnecessary to take the extreme powers that are taken under this Clause to enable the Government to come in and say, by the appointment of these commissioners, that they are appointing gentlemen of such outstanding ability and knowledge of the general industry of the country that they could say what was for the good of the industry, even if no single owner of a factory thought it was for their benefit or for that of the industry to amalgamate.
This can be said with more strength with regard to colliery undertakings where wholly different considerations arise. On the very arguments of the hon. Member for Springburn, it is impossible to appoint five commissioners to decide, without any reference to the owners of the colliery undertakings, whether it is to the interest of those undertakings to be amalgamated or not. Because of the peculiar conditions of the coal mining industry, which were so ably pointed out by the hon.
Member for Springburn, it is necessary in this industry above all industries to be assured, before you put the machinery of amalgamation into force, that at least one coal owner whom you propose to amalgamate does not think that it will mean, not the improvement of the industry but something that is entirely detrimental to it, and will consequential react and reflect upon the conditions of labour in the industry and tend to a lower standard of living.

Colonel LANE FOX: I have listened to this discussion—[Interruption].

The CHAIRMAN: These interruptions are entirely uncalled for, and completely out of order.

Colonel LANE FOX: These interruptions do not assist the Debate. I have no intention of obstructing, but only to say that it surprises me very much to see the attitude which hon. Gentlemen opposite are prepared to take on this Amendment. They are prepared to treat it as a frivolous Amendment. [HON. MEMBERS: "Hear, hear!"] If hon. Gentlemen take it as such, they do not realise the real seriousness that lay at the bottom of it. They are at liberty to hold their own opinions, but it is the grossest travesty of justice and common sense to suggest that a body of five stray commissioners are always to be set up as being bound to have better knowledge, better prevision and better understanding of the conditions of a district than even one single coal-owner in the district.
The hon. Member for North-East Bethnal Green (Major Nathan) was wrong in saying that this merely reproduces the position which was left by the 1926 Act. It is amazing to me that he as a business man could make such a speech. For a body of commissioners, without any previous expert knowledge of the district, to enforce a scheme of amalgamation upon a number of unwilling men, who have been engaged in a business, is a proposition that no business man could seriously accept. If the hon. and gallant Gentleman were engaged in any business, would he like to be subjected to this sort of proposal—[HON. MEMBERS: "Address the Chair!"] I am quite entitled to ask the hon. Member through the Chair, and if I am out of order, it will be for the Chair to re-
buke me, and not hon. Members opposite. Whatever business the hon. and gallant Gentleman below the Gangway has been in, he would resent very much being brought into an amalgamation to which he and the other proposed parties were absolutely hostile and being told that the whole cost, if the court turned the proposal down, was to be put upon him and those who had been brought into court with him. Obviously the hon. and gallant Member has not studied the proposal at all, or he would not have said that this Amendment would reproduce the conditions which were the result of the 1926 Act.
I wish hon. Members opposite would realise that there is great substance in the objections we are making. The Government cannot hope to have successful amalgamations worked on these lines. The proposal in the 1926 Act was at the time regarded as very drastic. It said that if one man in a district wished for amalgamation he could bring the others into court and could force upon them—of course, under the protection of the court—a scheme which they had not originated. Under this proposal it will not be necessary for one owner even to make representations. It will be the commissioners who will bring the case into Court. The scheme seems absolute madness, and how the Government can hope to have successful amalgamation schemes I cannot conceive. I hope the Committee will take this Amendment more seriously. The hon. Member for Springburn (Mr. Hardie) dealt with the incapacity of the coal owners. What right has he to say—

The CHAIRMAN: I pulled up the hon. Member for Springburn (Mr. Hardie) and the hon. and gallant Member cannot deal with that point.

Colonel LANE FOX: I think I shall be in order if you will allow me to say that his observations as to the incapacity of coal owners are no justification for saying that the opinion of not one single owner shall be respected in the matter of amalgamation. I am quite certain that if he, or any of his friends, had this treatment meted out to them in business he would believe that the Government were absolutely going mad.

Mr. HARDIE: My remark was this, that the condition of the industry to-day
showed that those who had charge of it did not know much about it, or it would not be in the mess in which it is.

Colonel LANE FOX: Unfortunately, that is part of the remarks which the Chairman very rightly ruled out of order, and so I cannot deal with the observation.

Mr. HARDIE: No, that gets you!

Colonel LANE FOX: I certainly say that no amount of incapacity in the past could justify such a proposal as this, which absolutely disregards the opinion of every single coal owner.

Major COLVILLE: I will not detain the Committee. I have something to say and, when I have said it, I will sit down. In these days there is a perfect passion for assuming that those who are engaged in any industry know less about it than those who are outside it. We set up research commissions and advisory councils and all kinds of bodies to advise those engaged in industry as to how they are to run it better. If it were allowed, I should like to answer the allegations of the hon. Member for Springburn (Mr. Hardie) in regard to industry, but I will say this, that the limit has been reached to-night by this proposal to set up a body with powers to initiate schemes of compulsory amalgamation in districts where not a single owner of an undertaking approves of it. I regard that as a most retrograde step. We know the proposal did not come from the Government, but from the benches below the Gangway. By what strange change is it that the Liberal party, once associated with liberty, now finds in compulsion a cure for all evils? Compulsion and liberty are strange bedfellows. I think the Liberal party are suffering from a compulsion complex. Only this morning, in Committee upstairs, we listened—

The CHAIRMAN: The hon. Member must not now discuss proceedings in a Committee upstairs.

Major COLVILLE: I will leave the Committee upstairs; at any rate, we have an example of the compulsion complex in the proposals which are now before us. This is not a frivolous point; in my opinion, the Amendment is one of great substance, and I believe we are taking a retrograde step in trying to force through the proposal in the Bill.
That is the opinion of the must distinguished body of mining engineers, the Institute of Mining Engineers. In spite of everything the hon. Member for Springburn may say, that Institute represents the finest traditions of mining engineering in the world.

Mr. HARDIE: Who said it did not?

Major COLVILLE: You said it did not.

Mr. HARDIE: I did not.

Major COLVILLE: The opinion of that highly technical body, as given before the Samuel Commission, is:
In the opinion of the Council, any attempt to group collieries compulsorily would be an unsound policy to adopt. It would have the effect of creating uncertainty, with the result that the investment of the capital necessary to maintain the industry in a healthy state would be checked, and it would furnish an additional unknown factor in deciding the future development and equipment policy of any individual undertaking.
Our Amendment is a serious one, and should be treated seriously. The advocates of compulsion who force this Bill through will be sorry for it afterwards. The hon. and gallant Member for North-East Bethnal Green (Major Nathan) said we were trying by this Amendment to sabotage the proposal. Better sabotage the proposal than sabotage the industry.

Mr. W. GRAHAM: This subject was debated at great length in the Second Reading speeches on the new Clauses, and it was agreed that we should have little discussion on the new Clauses, and I would express the hope that at all events we may now come to a decision on this Amendment. First, however, I will offer one or two words of explanation in reply to the Debate. This Clause defines the functions of the statutory commissioners for the purpose of colliery amalgamations. Of course, the whole plan is linked up to the Act of 1926, but it is the duty of these commissioners to facilitate the production of coal, and, so far as they can contribute to it, to confer increased efficiency on this industry, and, in particular, to promote amalgamation schemes.
The strict point before the Committee in this Amendment deals with initiative in getting these schemes started, or bringing them into being at all. The right
hon. and gallant Gentlemen the Member for Barkston Ash (Colonel Lane Fox) used what seemed to me to be a very extreme phrase when he referred to this proposal as madness. In the Act of 1926 there is, first of all, a provision for the purely voluntary submission of schemes to the Railway and Canal Commission, and then, if one owner can be produced in a district who is willing to go on with the scheme, he may go to the Railway and Canal Commission and they may apply a scheme of amalgamation to that district or to that number of undertakings. Therefore, I think it must be very difficult for the right hon. Gentleman to use that phrase, when the only difference between us is, so to speak, the guarantee of the initiative, and, in my judgment, that is all that is before us on this part of the proposal. We have the experience of the Act of 1926 and the simple question is whether expectations have been fulfilled. We have the two reports of the Mines Department in 1928 and 1929, and I think it will be generally admitted that they show that we have made little progress.
What is the effect of the Amendment? Beyond all question, it takes away the initiative from the new Commission, In other words, they can proceed only on essentially the basis of the Act of 1926, and, by doing so, you wipe out the three years' experience since the Royal Commission, on which their recommendation turned. Therefore, the Amendment goes right to the heart of the whole Clause. Then I wish to reply to the points made by the hon. Member for Ecclesall (Sir S. Roberts). Where the commissioners go to areas and take evidence, and a scheme is taken to the court and confirmed, the technical and professional costs will, under the terms of the Financial Resolution, be paid by the new amalgamated undertaking. Where the Statutory Commissioners have formed a scheme and taken it to the Railway and Canal Commissioners, who have to decide, and those commissioners decide that the scheme is not an appropriate one, the Railway and Canal Commission will give costs against the statutory commissioners, but that the commissioners should pay those costs out of their own pockets was never contemplated for a moment. That is the position, and I trust what I have said will resolve all doubts on the point raised in regard to costs.

10.0 p.m.

Sir S. ROBERTS: I think it was decided that there was no provision whereby the costs given by the Railway and Canal Commission should be paid by the Statutory Commissioners. In the case of the amalgamation of five collieries, there would be no provision whereby they could recover the costs.

Mr. GRAHAM: I think my hon. Friend has misunderstood the position in regard to the Ruling of the Chair. The Ruling was given on the strict terms of the Financial Resolution and, with great respect to the Chair, quite plainly it was out of order. I think I have answered most of the questions put to me, and I hope that we shall now come to a decision on this Clause.

Sir P. CUNLIFFE-LISTER: The President of the Board of Trade made a very interesting speech on the Second Reading of this Measure, but the impression which he left on my mind, after listening to that speech, was that he held very different views from those held by the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Darwen (Sir H. Samuel), who made it plain that what he was contemplating was that the commissioners would go about the country dividing the coalfields up into areas and forcing amalgamation upon a number of unwilling parties, thus carrying out a process of nationalisation without compensation or responsibility. That was the proposition of the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Darwen.
The President of the Board of Trade, when he introduced this Clause, told us that we were not to expect very much, and that it would take a long time before anything could be done; and he also stated that, if the commissioners were wise, they would concentrate on those areas where amalgamations were already in negotiation. That was one point of view, and, if the right hon. Gentleman really had in mind, or still has in mind, a Commission to stimulate amalgamations where amalgamations are already in contemplation, I am sure he will find a larger measure of sympathy in this House. What is the real test as to whether the amalgamations in contemplation are likely to be useful? Surely, it must be that among the firms it is proposed to amalgamate you find some who are anxious to see amalgamation go through.
Those are the lines upon which the President wishes to proceed, but by rejecting this Amendment he has shown that he is unwilling to confine his compulsory powers to those in favour of amalgamations. Instead of facilitating amalgamations on fruitful ground he is now trying to drive the unwilling sheep into the pen amalgamations. That way disaster lies. The result of this will be that you will try to make these people conduct the industry in a way which they do not wish to conduct it.
The right hon. Gentleman said "All I am doing really is to complete the Act of 1926." If there is one coalowner who is ready to go to the Railway and Canal Commission and to propose an amalgamation, that coalowner can take half a dozen others there and propose the amalgamation. That is true. But at any rate you have one willing person there, one who is willing to propose the amalgamation and to run the combined undertaking when it is taken over. It is one thing to assent to an amalgamation where one is ready to come in. It makes it rather a strong thing to expect one coalowner to go forward to treat with a number of other coalowners to amalgamate with them. The Amendment does not say that the coalowner has to go to the Railway and Canal Commission; all it says is that the Board of Trade are only to act when they get a representation from some coalowner in a district that he thinks the amalgamation will be worth while.
Really what it comes to is this: The right hon. Gentleman, under pressure, is abandoning the more reasonable attitude which he originally adopted in proposing these Clauses, in which he has not a very great belief. We have to face the position in which people are thrown into amalgamation without, at the outset, one single man in the district being ready to back the scheme and to form a team to run that scheme. I am perfectly certain that the right hon. Gentleman would never to go into any undertaking, whether a commercial or a political amalgamation on those terms. Would he propose an amalgamation of parties when there was not one single leader, not even one single follower, who was ready to say, "I think it would be a good thing to promote this amalgamation"? What the right hon.
Gentleman himself would, I am sure, be unwilling to do in any practical relation of life on the representation or dictation of hon. Gentlemen of the Liberal party, he is prepared to force upon the coal industry. I really believe that the right hon. Gentleman wishes to do something for the industry and to rescue it from the difficult position in which it finds itself. It would be best rescued by being left alone, but if the right hon. Gentleman

really wants to help the industry he certainly will not help it by trying to force upon it Something which not a single man in an area that he proposes to amalgamate is willing to support.

Question put, "That those words be there inserted."

The Committee divided: Ayes, 144; Noes, 290.

Division No. 182.]
AYES.
[10.11 p.m.


Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel
Forestier-Walker, Sir L.
Muirhead, A. J.


Ainsworth, Lieut.-Col. Charles
Fremantle, Lieut.-Colonel Francis E.
Nield, Rt. Hon. Sir Herbert


Alien, W. E. D. (Belfast, W.)
Ganzoni, Sir John
Oman, Sir Charles William C.


Ashley, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Wilfrid W.
Gibson, C. G. (Pudsey & Otley)
O'Neill, Sir H.


Astor, Maj. Hn. John J. (Kent, Dover)
Glyn, Major R. G. C.
Ormsby-Gore, nt. Hon. William


Baldwin, Rt. Hon. Stanley (Bewdley)
Gower, Sir Robert
Peake, Captain Osbert


Balfour, Captain H. H. (I. of Thanet)
Grace, John
Penny, Sir George


Beamish, Rear-Admiral T. P. H.
Graham, Fergus (Cumberland, N.)
Peto, Sir Basil E. (Devon, Barnstaple)


Beaumont, M. W.
Greene, W. P. Crawford
Ramsbotham, H.


Berry, Sir George
Grenfell, Edward C. (City of London)
Reid, David D. (County Down)


Bevan, S. J. (Holborn)
Gretton, Colonel Rt. Hon. John
Remer, John R.


Birchall, Major Sir John Dearman
Gritten, W. G. Howard
Rentoul, Sir Gervais S.


Bird, Ernest Roy
Gunston, Captain D. W.
Richardson, Sir P. W. (Sur'y, Ch'ts'y)


Bourne, Captain Robert Croft
Hamilton, Sir George (Ilford)
Roberts, Sir Samuel (Ecclesall)


Boyce, H. L.
Hanbury, C.
Rodd, Rt. Hon. Sir James Rennell


Bracken, B.
Harvey, Major S. E. (Devon, Totnes)
Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)


Braithwaite, Major A. N.
Heneage, Lieut.-Colonel Arthur P.
Salmon, Major I.


Brass, Captain Sir William
Hennessy, Major Sir G. R. J.
Samuel, Samuel (W'dsworth, Putney)


Brown, Col. D. C. (N'th'l'd., Hexham)
Hope, Sir Harry (Forfar)
Sandeman, Sir N. Stewart


Brown, Brig.-Gen. H. C. (Berks, Newb'y)
Howard-Bury, Colonel C. K.
Savery, S. S.


Cadogan, Major Hon. Edward
Hudson, Capt, A. U. M. (Hackney, N.)
Simms, Major-General J.


Carver, Major W. H.
Hurd, Percy A.
Sinclair, Col. T. (Queen's U., Belfast)


Castle Stewart, Earl of
Hurst, Sir Gerald B.
Skelton, A. N.


Cautley, Sir Henry S.
Iveagh, Countess of
Smith, Louis W. (Sheffield, Hallam)


Cayzer, Maj. Sir Herbt. R. (Prtsmth, S.)
James, Lieut.-Colonel Hon. Cuthbert
Smith, R. W. (Aberd'n & Kinc'dine. C.)


Christle, J. A.
Jones, Sir G. W. H. (Stoke New'gton)
Smith-Carington, Neville W.


Churchill, Rt. Hon. Winston Spencer
King, Commodore Rt. Hon. Henry D.
Smithers, Waldron


Colman, N. C. D.
Knox, Sir Alfred
Somerset, Thomas


Colville, Major D. J.
Lamb, Sir J. Q.
Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)


Courtauld, Major J. S.
Lane Fox, Rt. Hon. George R.
Somerville, D. G. (Willesden, East)


Crichton-Stuart, Lord C.
Law, Sir Alfred (Derby, High Peak)
Southby, Commander A. R. J.


Crookshank, Capt. H. C.
Leighton, Major B. E. P.
Stanley, Maj. Hon. O. (W'morland)


Croom-Johnson, R. p.
Llewellin, Major J. J.
Steel-Maitland, Rt. Hon. Sir Arthur


Culverwell, C. T. (Bristol, West)
Long, Major Eric
Thomson, Sir F.


Cunliffe-Lister, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip
Lymington, Viscount
Todd, Capt. A. J.


Dairymple-White, Lt.-Col. Sir Godfrey
McConnell, Sir Joseph
Train, J.


Davidson, Rt. Hon. J. (Hertford)
MacRobert, Rt. Hon. Alexander M.
Turton, Robert Hugh


Davidson, Major-General Sir J. H.
Maitland, A. (Kent, Faversham)
Vaughan-Morgan, Sir Kenyon


Davies, Dr. Vernon
Makins, Brigadier-General E.
Ward, Lieut.-Col. Sir A. Lambert


Davies, Maj. Geo. F. (Somerset, Yeovil)
Margesson, Captain H. D.
Warrender, Sir Victor


Dixey, A. C.
Mason, Colonel Glyn K.
Waterhouse, Captain Charles


Dugdale, Capt. T. L.
Meller, R. J.
Wells, Sydney R.


Edmondson, Major A. J.
Merriman, Sir F. Boyd
Williams, Charles (Devon, Torquay)


Erskine, Lord (Somerset, Weston-s.-M.)
Mitchell, Sir W. Lane (Streatham)
Wilson, G. H- A. (Cambridge U.)


Falle, Sir Bertram G.
Mond, Hon. Henry
Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George


Ferguson, Sir John
Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. Sir B.
Womorsley, W. J.


Fielden, E. B.
Moore, Sir Newton J. (Richmond)



Fison, F. G. Clavering
Morrison, W. S. (Glos., Cirencester)
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Ford, Sir P. J.
Morrison-Bell, Sir Arthur Clive
Captain Sir George Bowyer and




Captain Wallace.


NOES.


Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife, West)
Batey, Joseph
Broad, Francis Alfred


Adamson, W. M. (Stan., Cannock)
Beckett, John (Camberwell, Peckham)
Brockway, A. Fenner


Addison, Rt. Hon. Dr. Christopher
Bellamy, Albert
Bromfield, William


Aitchison, Rt. Hon. Craigle M.
Benn, Rt. Hon. Wedgwood
Bromley, J.


Alpass, J. H.
Bennett, Captain E. N. (Cardiff, Central)
Brooke, W.


Ammon, Charles George
Bennett, William (Battersea, South)
Brothers, M.


Angell, Norman
Benson, G.
Brown, C. W. E. (Notts. Mansfield)


Aske, Sir Robert
Bentham, Dr. Ethel
Brown, Ernest (Leith)


Attlee, Clement Richard
Bevan, Aneurin (Ebbw Vale)
Brown, James (Ayr and Bute)


Ayles, Walter
Birkett, W. Norman
Buchanan, G.


Baker, John (Wolverhampton, Bilston)
Blindell, James
Burgess, F. G.


Baldwin, Oliver (Dudley)
Bowen, J. W.
Burgin, Dr. E. L.


Barnes, Alfred John
Bowerman, Rt. Hon. Charles W.
Buxton, C. R. (Yorks. W. R. Elland)


Buxton, Rt. Hon. Noel (Norfolk, N.)
Kelly, W. T.
Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)


Calne, Derwent Hall-
Kennedy, Thomas
Riley, Ben (Dewsbury)


Cameron, A. G.
Kenworthy, Lt.-Com. Hon. Joseph M.
Riley, F. F. (Stockton-on-Tees)


Cape, Thomas
Kinley, J.
Ritson, J.


Carter, W. (St. Pancras, S. W.)
Kirkwood, D.
Roberts, Rt. Hon. F. O. (W. Bromwich)


Charleton, H. C.
Knight, Holford
Romeril, H. G.


Chater, Daniel
Lambert, Rt. Hon. George (S. Molton)
Rosbotham, D. S. T.


Church, Major A. G.
Lang, Gordon
Rothschild, J. de


Clarke, J. S.
Lansbury, Rt. Hon. George
Rowson, Guy


Cluse, W. S.
Law, Albert (Bolton)
Russell, Richard John (Eddisbury)


Clynes, Rt. Hon. John R.
Law, A. (Rossendale)
Salter, Dr. Alfred


Cocks, Frederick Seymour
Lawrence, Susan
Samuel, H. W. (Swansea. West)


Compton, Joseph
Lawrie, Hugh Hartley (Stalybridge)
Sanders, W. S.


Daggar, George
Lawson, John James
Sandham, E


Dallas, George
Lawther, W. (Barnard Castle)
Sawyer, G. F.


Dalton, Hugh
Leach, W.
Scott, James


Davies, E. C. (Montgomery)
Lee, Frank (Derby, N. E.)
Scurr, John


Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)
Lee, Jennie (Lanark, Northern)
Sexton, James


Day, Harry
Lees, J.
Shakespeare, Geoffrey H.


Dennian, Hon. R. D.
Lewis, T. (Southampton)
Shaw, Rt. Hon. Thomas (Preston)


Dudgeon, Major C. R.
Lloyd, C. Ellis
Shepherd, Arthur Lewis


Dukes, C.
Longbottom, A. W.
Sherwood, G. H.


Duncan, Charles
Longden, F.
Shield, George William


Ede, James Chuter
Lowth, Thomas
Shiels, Dr. Drummond


Edmunds, J. E.
Lunn, William
Shillaker, J. F.


Edwards, C. (Monmouth, Bedwellty)
Macdonald, Gordon (Ince)
Shinwell, E.


Edwards, E. (Morpeth)
MacDonald, Rt. Hon. J. R. (Seaham)
Short, Alfred (Wednesbury)


Egan, W. H.
Macdonald, Sir M. (Inverness)
Simmons, C. J.


Evans, Capt. Ernest (Welsh Univer.)
McElwee, A.
Sinkinson, George


Foot, Isaac
McEntee, V. L.
Smith, Alfred (Sunderland)


Freeman, Peter
McKinlay, A.
Smith, Ben (Bermondsey, Rotherhithe)


Gardner, B. W. (West Ham, Upton)
MacLaren, Andrew
Smith, Frank (Nuneaton)


George, Major G. Lloyd (Pembroke)
Maclean, Sir Donald (Cornwall, N.)
Smith, H. B. Lees (Keighley)


Gibbins, Joseph
Maclean, Neil (Glasgow, Govan)
Smith, Rennle (Penistone)


Gibson, H. M. (Lanes. Mossley)
MacNeill-Weir, L.
Smith, Tom (Pontefract)


Gill, T. H.
McShane, John James
Smith, W. R. (Norwich)


Gillett, George M.
Malone, C. L'Estrange (N'thampton)
Snell, Harry


Glassey, A. E.
Mander, Geoffrey le M.
Snowden, Rt. Hon. Philip


Gossling, A. G.
Mansfield, W.
Snowden, Thomas (Accrington)


Gould, F.
March, S.
Sorensen, R.


Graham, D. M. (Lanark, Hamilton)
Marcus, M.
Stamford, Thomas W.


Graham, Rt. Hon. Wm. (Edin., Cent.)
Markham, S. F.
Stephen, Campbell


Granville, E.
Marley, J.
Stewart, J. (St. Rollox)


Gray, Milner
Marshall, Fred
Strachey, E. J. St. Loe


Greenwood, Rt. Hon. A. (Colne)
Mathers, George
Strauss, G. R.


Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)
Matters, L. W.
Sullivan, J.


Griffith, F. Kingsley (Middlesbro' W.)
Maxton, James
Sutton, J. E.


Griffiths, T. (Monmouth, Pontypool)
Melville, Sir James
Taylor, R. A. (Lincoln)


Groves, Thomas E.
Messer, Fred
Taylor, W. B. (Norfolk, S. W.)


Grundy, Thomas W.
Millar, J. D.
Thomas, Rt. Hon. J. H. (Derby)


Hall, F. (York, W. R., Normanton)
Mills, J. E.
Thurtle, Ernest


Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)
Milner, J.
Tillett, Ben


Hall, Capt. W. P. (Portsmouth, C.)
Montague, Frederick
Tinker, John Joseph


Hamilton, Mary Agnes (Blackburn)
Morgan, Dr. H. B.
Tout, W. J.


Hamilton, Sir R. (Orkney & Zetland)
Morley, Ralph
Tow[...]end, A. E.


Hardie, George D.
Morris, Rhys Hopkins
Trevelyan, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles


Hartshorn, Rt. Hon. Vernon
Morris-Jones. Dr. J. H. (Denbigh)
Turner, B.


Hastings, Dr. Somerville
Morrison, Herbert (Hackney, South)
Vaughan, D. J.


Haycock, A. W.
Morrison, Robert C. (Tottenham, N.)
Viant, S. P.


Hayday, Arthur
Mort, D. L.
Walker, J.


Hayes, John Henry
Moses, J. J. H.
Wallace, H. W.


Henderson, Arthur, Junr. (Cardiff, S.)
Mosley, Lady C. (Stoke-on-Trent)
Watkins, F. C.


Henderson, Thomas (Glasgow)
Mosley, Sir Oswald (Smethwick)
Watson, w. M. (Dunfermline)


Henderson, W. W. (Middx., Enfield)
Muggeridge, H. T.
Wellock, Wilfred


Herriotts, J.
Nathan, Major H. L.
Welsh, James (Paisley)


Hirst, G. H. (York W. H. Wentworth)
Naylor, T. E.
Welsh, James C. (Coatbridge)


Hoffman, P. C.
Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter)
West, F. R.


Hollins, A.
Noel Baker, P. J.
Westwood, Joseph


Hopkin, Daniel
Oldfield, J. R.
Wheatley, Rt. Hon. J.


Horrabin, J. F.
Oliver, George Harold (Ilkeston)
Whiteley, Wilfrid (Birm., Ladywood)


Hudson, James H. (Huddersfield)
Oliver, P. M. (Man., Blackley)
Whiteley, William (Blaydon)


Hunter, Dr. Joseph
Owen, Major G. (Carnarvon)
Wilkinson, Ellen C.


Hutchison, Maj.-Gen. Sir R.
Palin, John Henry
Williams, David (Swansea, East)


Isaacs, George
Palmer, E. T.
Williams, Dr. J. H. (Llanelly)


Jenkins, W. (Glamorgan, Neath)
Perry, S. F.
Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)


John, William (Rhondda, West)
Pethick-Lawrence, F. W.
Wilson, C. H. (Sheffield, Attercliffe)


Johnston, Thomas
Phillips, Dr. Marion
Wilson, J. (Oldham)


Jones, F. Llewellyn- (Flint)
Picton-Turbervill, Edith
Wilson, R. J. (Jarrow)


Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)
Potts, John S.
Winterton, G. E. (Leicester, Longhb'gh)


Jones, J. J. (West Ham, Silvertown)
Price, M. P.
Wright, W. (Rutherglen)


Jones, Rt. Hon. Leif (Camborne)
Pybus, Percy John
Young, R. S. (Islington, North)


Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)
Quibell, D. J. K.



Jowett, Rt. Hon. F. W.
Ramsay, T. B. Wilson
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Jowitt, Rt. Hon. Sir W. A.
Raynes, W. R.
Mr. Allen Parkinson and Mr. Paling.


Kedward, R. M. (Kent, Ashford)
Richards, R.

Commodore KING: I beg to move as an Amendment to the proposed Clause, in line 2, to leave out from the word "Commission" to the word "to" in line 4.
The words I propose to leave out are:
to further the reorganisation of the coal mining industry with a view to facilitating the production, supply, and sale of coal by owners of coal mines and for that purpose.
I move this Amendment partly to find out what is the intention of the President of the Board of Trade with regard to the duty of the Reorganisation Commission and partly to avoid any overlapping in the carrying out of their duty. The duty of furthering the reorganisation and facilitating the production, supply, and sale is really being dealt with by the central body and by the executive boards of the districts. The whole of the work laid down in Part I is, as headed in that part of the Bill, to further the reorganisation, etc. We want to make quite sure that the Commission is not going to be charged with the duty of duplicating the work which has already been allotted to the other bodies. It would be extremely inconvenient if the same duties were put into the hands of two different independent bodies. For instance, the main duty of the Reorganisation Commission is to bring about amalgamations, but if, under the wording that we seek to delete, they are to have the power of going into the question as to what the national output of the country should be and how the district quota is to be divided amongst the different pits, if they are to be allowed to go into complaints as to whether any particular district considers that its district quota is too small, or whether the coal mines in those districts consider that their quota is too small, that is all part of the reorganisation that is laid down in Part I, and it certainly looks to me as if—it may be inadvertently—those duties are being duplicated.
I realise that the right hon. Gentleman has given a great deal of care and attention to the actual wording, but I do not think the words can be put in there merely for the sake of a heading. Very similar words were put at the head of the Financial Resolution and we were told that that was, after all, more or less part of the Title of the Bill and that was why it had to be put in there. But, if
that is so, these Clauses are to be part of the Bill and, therefore, the reasons for their being introduced are set out in the Title. We do not set it out again at the head of every Clause that is introduced and, therefore, it appears to us that there must be some motive in the right hon. Gentleman's mind in again saying that this Reorganisation Commission is to be entitled to go into all these other questions which they are providing for under Part I of the Bill. I think he will agree that if that is so, it certainly looks as if they will have power to do that, and he will probably agree with me that it would be very unnecessary and undesirable if they were to exercise that power. If he goes with me as far as that, and if he considers that these duties would be undesirable, I hope he will go with us the whole length and agree to our Amendment to leave out the words. If the duties are not intended to be placed there, it is certainly desirable that the words which might give those powers should be deleted. I think that this is a point of substance. I would like the right hon. Gentleman to consider it, and I hope that he will accept the Amendment.

Sir A. LAMBERT WARD: I wish to say a few words in support of this Amendment. I think that the words proposed to be left out crystallise to a large extent the objection which I feel towards this Bill as a whole. It is true that these particular words appear in other places. They appear in the first Clause of Part 1. I do not think that I shall be out of order in explaining why I so strongly object to this Clause as it stands, and why I consider that this Amendment, which has been so ably moved by my right hon. and gallant Friend the Member for South Paddington (Commodore King) is essential to the future welfare of this country. With two-thirds of the words which the Amendment proposes to leave out I am in agreement; it is only the other third to which I am opposed. I am in entire accord with the consolidation of production and supply of coal, but when we come to deal with facilitating the sale of coal, I at once take exception. I fear that the result of that will be an increase in the cost of coal to the consumer. We have seen what has been going on during the last two or three years without the legal sanction which
this Clause and this Bill, if it becomes au Act, will provide. Small amalgamations have already been formed, and they have differentiated in the price of coal between different classes of consumer. There has been one price for the private consumer, one price for industrial coal, another price for export coal, and, in some oases, there has been a fourth price for bunkers. That has been going on for some time.
The result of the Bill will be to give legal sanction to what, I believe, is an utterly unsatisfactory state of affairs. It is unfair that people in this country should be compelled to pay more for their coal so that collieries may be in a position to sell coal to Continental and foreign consumers at a loss. It is not many years ago in this country that the word "trust" or "combine" was anathema in the ears of the people. It is only about 15 years ago that the entire ingenuity of the United States legislature was directed to framing legislation to prevent the formation of these gigantic trusts and combines. To-day we are told that trusts and combines under another name are the salvation of industry. This sale of coal abroad at a lower rate than it is sold to consumers at home has teen going on for some time already. During the whole of last year English coal was sold on the coast of Belgium and on the north coast of France at 27s. 6d. per ton. That is £l less than it could be bought by consumers in London, and yet the cost of freight and handling must have been approximately the same. It came to this, that the colliery combine were selling coal in Belgium at a price even lower than they were prepared to take at the pithead in this country from English consumers. Practically all the mail boats and passenger boats which run between England and Belgium and between England and the North Coast of France were buying English coal on the other side of the Channel.

The DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN: The hon. and gallant Member is going wide of the question.

Sir A. LAMBERT WARD: With due respect, I would submit that this Amendment is to omit the words "facilitating the production, supply, and sale of coal," and I am pointing out what has been the result of a similar state of affairs which
has been going on for the past two years. I am submitting that if we give legal Sancton to that state of affairs, it will make matters still worse than they are at the present time. If you Rule that I must not continue in that strain, I will not do so. The fact is, that combinations of the kind which this Clause will encourage, and which the Amendment is endeavouring to do away with, have had the effect of causing coal to be sold abroad at a lower price than it has been sold at here. If we do not carry the Amendment, and these particular words are not omitted from the Clause, the effect will be to legalise a slate of affairs which has been going on for some time and which is not for the welfare of this country or for the trade of this country. If we allow this state of affairs to go on, and these combines are encouraged to sell coal abroad—

The DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN: I cannot allow the hon. and gallant Member further to develop that line of argument.

Sir A. LAMBERT WARD: I will not proceed further on that line. Unless these words are omitted we shall not do a great deal in the way of facilitating the sale of coal, but we shall grievously handicap the trade and industry of this country.

Mr. W. GRAHAM: Perhaps one or two words of explanation will be sufficient to enable the hon. and gallant Member to withdraw the Amendment. A clear distinction must be drawn between Part I of the Bill, dealing with the marketing scheme and the part of the Bill with which the Committee is now concerned with regard to the amalgamation proposals. It is true that the words
for facilitating the production, supply and sale of coal,
are related to Part I, "Production, Supply and Sale of Coal" and there is a certain amount of substance in the statement that they appear to be a repetition and might very well be deleted from this part of the Bill, but I can reply to that in the clearest way. It is true that the operative part of this proposal is to promote these amalgamation schemes, and it is to the amalgamation schemes so promoted that legislative sanction is to be given.
These words are incorporated here perhaps, not so much with the intention
of doing this, as showing that the idea in mind is that inquiry and investigations are necessary. The commissioners, in the course of their duties, may not be able in some cases to recommend amalgamation schemes, but they may say that certain steps should be taken by the owners in a district, and the owners in certain districts might welcome a word to that effect from an outside body. Very often they will welcome that rather than have it put up by an individual owner, from whom in many cases it may not be forthcoming at all. If the words remain it is my duty to advise the Committee that they have no legislative effect. Legislative sanction is given to the amalgamation scheme, but I think this might be in many cases a useful environment for that effort and for that reason only I think the words should be retained. I hope with this explanation that the hon. and gallant Member will not press the Amendment.

Captain PEAKE: The right hon. Gentleman may have satisfied himself about this matter, but he has by no means satisfied us on these benches. He has made it perfectly clear that the words we propose to leave out are totally redundant. I believe they are so far as the right hon. Gentleman is concerned, but a close inspection of the Order Paper betrays the fact that, when we come to discuss Part I of the Bill, there are no less than 20 or 30 Amendments in the

name of hon. Members of the Liberal party which propose to leave out the words "The Board of Trade" and to insert instead thereof the words "the Commission set up under this Act." It is undoubtedly the intention of hon. Members of the Liberal party to transfer the whole of the functions of the Board of Trade under Part I to this reorganisation Commission, and I believe the Clause which we are now discussing was drafted by hon. Members below the Gangway, and that they put these words in with the intention that the functions of the Board of Trade under Part I should be taken over by this Commission. If the right hon. Gentleman says that the words are redundant, surely it is better to leave them out altogether? One of two things has happened, either they are put in on account of what is going to follow on Clause 1, or else they are put in in order to bring Clauses within the scope of the Bill which we on these benches contend never were within the scope of the Bill and ought never to be in the Bill at all. In these circumstances, we are not at all satisfied with the explanation.

Mr. TURNER rose in his place, and claimed to move, "That the Question be now put."

Question put, "That the Question be now put."

The Committee divided: Ayes, 285; Noes, 147.

Division No. 183.]
AYES.
[10.39 p.m.


Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife, West)
Brothers, M.
Duncan, Charles


Adamson, W. M. (Staff., Cannock)
Brown, C. W. E. (Notts, Mansfield)
Ede, James Chuter


Addison, Rt. Hon. Dr. Christopher
Brown, Ernest (Leith)
Edmunds, J. E.


Aitchison, Rt. Hon. Craigle M.
Brown, James (Ayr and Bute)
Edwards, C. (Monmouth, Bedwellty)


Alpass, J. H.
Buchanan, G.
Edwards, E. (Morpeth)


Ammon, Charles George
Burgess, F. G.
Egan, W. H.


Angell, Norman
Burgin, Dr. E. L.
Evans, Capt. Ernest (Welsh Univ.)


Aske, Sir Robert
Buxton, C. R. (Yorks. W. R. Elland)
Foot, Isaac


Attlee, Clement Richard
Buxton, Rt. Hon. Noel (Norfolk, N.)
Freeman, Peter


Ayles, Walter
Caine, Derwent Hall-
Gardner, B. W. (West Ham, Upton)


Baker, John (Wolverhampton, Bilston)
Cameron, A. G.
George, Major G. Lloyd (Pembroke)


Barnes, Alfred John
Cape, Thomas
Gibbins, Joseph


Batey, Joseph
Carter, W. (St. Pancras, S. W.)
Gibson, H. M. (Lanes. Mossley)


Beckett, John (Camberwell, Peckham)
Charleton, H. C.
Gill, T. H.


Bellamy, Albert
Chater, Daniel
Gillett, George M.


Benn, Rt. Hon. Wedgwood
Church, Major A. G.
Glassey, A. E.


Bennett, Captain E. N. (Cardiff, Central)
Clarke, J. S.
Gossling, A. G.


Bennett, William (Battersea, South)
Cluse, W. S.
Gould, F.


Benson, G.
Clynes, Rt. Hon. John R.
Graham, D. M. (Lanark, Hamilton)


Bentham, Dr. Ethel
Cocks, Frederick Seymour
Graham, Rt. Hon. Wm. (Edin., Cent.)


Bevan, Aneurin (Ebbw Vale)
Compton, Joseph
Granville, E.


Birkett, W. Norman
Daggar, George
Gray, Milner


Blindell, James
Dallas, George
Greenwood, Rt. Hon. A. (Colne)


Bowen, J. W.
Dalton, Hugh
Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)


Bowerman, Rt. Hon. Charles W
Davies, E. C. (Montgomery)
Griffith, F. Kingsley (Middlesbro' W.)


Broad, Francis Alfred
Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)
Griffiths, T. (Monmouth, Pontypool)


Brockway, A. Fenner
Day, Harry
Groves, Thomas E.


Bromfield, William
Denman, Hon. R. D.
Grundy, Thomas W.


Bromley, J.
Dudgeon, Major C. R.
Hall, F. (York, W. R., Normanton)


Brooke, W.
Dukes, C.
Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)


Hall, Capt. W. P. (Portsmouth, C.)
MacNeill-Weir, L.
Sexton, James


Hamilton, Mary Agnes (Blackburn)
McShane, John James
Shakespeare, Geoffrey H.


Hamilton, Sir R. (Orkney & Zetland)
Malone, C. L'Estrange (N'thampton)
Shaw, Rt. Hon. Thomas (Preston)


Hardie, George D.
Mander, Geoffrey le M.
Shepherd, Arthur Lewis


Hartshorn, Rt. Hon. Vernon
Mansfield, w.
Sherwood, G. H.


Hastings, Dr. Somerville
March, S.
Shield, George William


Haycock, A. W.
Marcus, M.
Shiels, Dr. Drummond


Hayday, Arthur
Markham, S. F.
Shillaker, J. F.


Hayes, John Henry
Marley, J.
Shinwell, E.


Henderson, Arthur, Junr. (Cardiff, S.)
Marshall, Fred
Short, Alfred (Wednesbury)


Henderson, Thomas (Glasgow)
Mathers, George
Simmons, C. J.


Henderson, W. W. (Middx., Enfield)
Maxton, James
Sinkinson, George


Herriotts, J.
Melville, Sir James
Smith, Alfred (Sunderland)


Hirst, G. H. (York, W. R., Wentworth)
Messer, Fred
Smith, Ben (Bermondsey, Rotherhithe)


Hoffman, P. C.
Millar, J. D.
Smith, Frank (Nuneaton)


Hollins, A.
Mills, J. E.
Smith, H. B. Lees (Keighley)


Hopkin, Daniel
Milner, J.
Smith, Rennie (Penistone)


Horrabin, J. F.
Morgan, Dr. H. B.
Smith, Tom (Pontefract)


Hudson, James H. (Huddersfield)
Morley, Ralph
Smith, W. R. (Norwich)


Hunter, Dr. Joseph
Morris-Jones, Dr. J. H. (Denbigh)
Snell, Harry


Hutchison, Maj.-Gen. Sir R.
Morrison, Herbert (Hackney, South)
Snowden, Rt. Hon. Philip


Isaacs, George
Morrison, Robert C. (Tottenham, N.)
Snowden, Thomas (Accrington)


Jenkins, W. (Glamorgan, Neath)
Mort, D. L.
Sorensen, R.


John, William (Rhondda, West)
Moses, J. J. H.
Stamford, Thomas W.


Johnston, Thomas
Mosley, Lady C. (Stoke-on-Trent)
Stephen, Campbell


Jones, F. Llewellyn- (Flint)
Mosley, Sir Oswald (Smethwick)
Stewart, J. (St. Rollox)


Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)
Muggeridge, H. T.
Strachey, E. J. St. Loe


Jones, J. J. (West Ham, Silvertown)
Nathan, Major H. L.
Strauss, G. R.


Jones, Rt. Hon. Leif (Camborne)
Naylor, T. E.
Sullivan, J.


Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)
Noel Baker, P. J.
Sutton, J. E.


Jones, T. I. Mardy (Pontypridd)
Oldfield, J. R.
Taylor, R. A. (Lincoln)


Jowett, Rt. Hon. F. W.
Oliver, George Harold (Ilkeston)
Taylor, W. B. (Norfolk, S. W.)


Jowitt, Rt. Hon. Sir W. A.
Oliver, P. M. (Man., Blackley)
Thomas, Rt. Hon. J. H. (Derby)


Kedward, R. M. (Kent, Ashford)
Owen, Major G. (Carnarvon)
Thurtle, Ernest


Kelly, W. T.
Palin, John Henry
Tillett, Ben


Kennedy, Thomas
Palmer, E. T.
Tinker, John Joseph


Kinley, J.
Parkinson, John Allen (Wigan)
Tout, W. J.


Knight, Holford
Perry, S. F.
Townend, A. E.


Lambert, Rt. Hon. George (S. Molton)
Pethick-Lawrence, F. W.
Trevelyan, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles


Lang, Gordon
Phillips, Dr. Marion
Turner, B.


Lansbury, Rt. Hon. George
Picton-Turbervill, Edith
Vaughan, D. J.


Lathan, G.
Potts, John S.
Viant, S. P.


Law, A. (Rosendale)
Price, M. P.
Walker, J.


Lawrence, Susan
Pybus, Percy John
Wallace, H. W.


Lawrie, Hugh Hartley (Stalybridge)
Quibell, D. J. K.
Watkins, F. C.


Lawson, John James
Ramsay, T. B. Wilson
Watson, W. M. (Dunfermline)


Lawther, W. (Barnard Castle)
Raynes, W. R.
Wellock, Wilfred


Leach, W.
Richards, R.
Welsh, James (Paisley)


Lee, Frank (Derby, N. E.)
Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)
Welsh, James C. (Coatbridge)


Lee, Jennie (Lanark, Northern)
Riley, Ben (Dewsbury)
West, F. R.


Lees, J.
Riley, F. F. (Stockton-on-Tees)
Westwood, Joseph


Lewis, T. (Southampton)
Ritson, J.
Whiteley, Wilfrid (Birm., Ladywood)


Lloyd, C. Ellis
Roberts, Rt. Hon. F. O. (W. Bromwich)
Wilkinson, Ellen C.


Longbottom, A. W.
Romeril, H. G.
Williams, David (Swansea, East)


Longden, F.
Roshotham, D. S. T.
Williams, Dr. J. H (Llanelly)


Lowth, Thomas
Rothschild, J. de
Williams, T. (York. Don Valley)


Lunn, William
Rowson, Guy
Wilson, C. H. (Sheffield, Attercliffe)


Macdonald, Gordon (Ince)
Russell, Richard John (Eddlsbury)
Wilson, J. (Oldham)


MacDonald, Rt. Hon. J. R. (Seaham)
Salter, Dr. Alfred
Wilson, R. J. (Jarrow)


Macdonald, Sir M. (Inverness)
Samuel, Rt. Hon. Sir H. (Darwen)
Winterton, G. E. (Leicester, Loughb'gh)


McElwee, A.
Samuel, H. W. (Swansea, West)
Wright, W. (Rutherglen)


McEntee, V. L.
Sanders, W. S.
Young, R. S. (Islington, North)


McKinlay, A.
Sandham, E.



MacLaren, Andrew
Sawyer, G. F
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Maclean, Sir Donald (Cornwal,. N.)
Scott, James
Mr. Whiteley and Mr. Paling.


Maclean, Neil (Glasgow, Govan)
Scurr, John



NOES.


Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel
Bowyer, Captain Sir George E. W.
Colman, N. C. D.


Albery, Irving James
Boyce, H. L.
Colville, Major D. J.


Allen, W. E. D. (Belfast, W.)
Bracken, B.
Courtauld, Major J. S.


Ashley, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Wilfrid W.
Braithwaite, Major A. N.
Courthope, Colonel Sir G. L.


Astor, Maj. Hn. John J. (Kent, Dover)
Brass, Captain Sir William
Crichton-Stuart, Lord C.


Baldwin, Rt. Hon. Stanley (Bewdley)
Brown, Col. D. C. (N'th'l'd., Hexham)
Crookshank, Cpt. H. (Lindsey, Gainsbro)


Balfour, George (Hampstead)
Brown, Brig.-Gen. H. C. (Berks, Newb'y)
Croom-Johnson, R. P.


Balfour, Captain H. H. (I. of Thanet)
Butler, R. A.
Culverwell, C. T. (Bristol, West)


Beamish, Rear-Admiral T. P. H.
Cadogan, Major Hon. Edward
Cunliffe-Lister, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip


Beaumont, M. W.
Carver, Major W. H.
Dairymple-White, Lt.-Col. Sir Godfrey


Berry, Sir George
Castle Stewart, Earl of
Davidson, Rt. Hon. J. (Hertford)


Bevan, S. J. (Holborn)
Cautley, Sir Henry S.
Davidson, Major-General Sir J. H.


Birchall, Major Sir John Dearman
Cayzer, Maj. Sir Herbt. R. (Prtsmth, S.)
Davies, Dr. Vernon


Bird, Ernest Roy
Christle, J. A.
Davies, Maj. Geo. F. (Somerset, Yeovil)


Bourne, Captain Robert Croft
Churchill, Rt. Hon. Winston Spencer
Dixey, A. C.




Dugdale, Capt. T. L.
Lane Fox, Rt. Hon. George R.
Rodd, Rt. Hon. Sir James Rennell


Edmondson, Major A. J.
Law, Sir Alfred (Derby, High Peak)
Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)


Erskine, Lord (Somerset, Weston-s.-M.)
Leighton, Major B. E. P.
Samuel, Samuel (W'dsworth, Putney)


Falle, Sir Bertram G.
Llewellin, Major J. J.
Sandeman, Sir N. Stewart


Ferguson, Sir John
Long, Major Eric
Savery, S. S.


Fielden, E. B.
Lymington, Viscount
Simms, Major-General J.


Fison, F. G. Clavering
McConnell, Sir Joseph
Sinclair, Col. T. (Queen's U., Belfast)


Ford, Sir P. J.
MacRobert, Rt. Hon. Alexander M.
Skelton, A. N.


Forestier-Walker, Sir L.
Maitland, A. (Kent, Faversham)
Smith, Louis W. (Sheffield, Hallam)


Fremantle, Lieut.-Colonel Francis E.
Makins, Brigadier-General E.
Smith, R. W. (Aberd'n & Kinc'dine, C.)


Ganzonl, Sir John
Margesson, Captain H. D.
Smith-Carington, Neville W.


Gault, Lieut.-Col. Andrew Hamilton
Mason, Colonel Glyn K.
Smithers, Waldron


Gibson, C. G. (Pudsey & Otley)
Meller, R. J.
Somerset, Thomas


Glyn, Major R. G. C.
Merriman, Sir F. Boyd
Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)


Gower, Sir Robert
Mitchell, Sir W. Lane (Streatham)
Somerville, D. G. (Willesden, East)


Graham, Fergus (Cumberland, N.)
Mond, Hon. Henry
Southby, Commander A. R. J.


Greene, W. P. Crawford
Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. Sir B.
Stanley, Maj. Hon. O. (W'morland)


Gretton, Colonel Rt. Hon. John
Moore, Sir Newton J. (Richmond)
Steel-Maitland, Rt. Hon. Sir Arthur


Gritten, W. G. Howard
Morrison, w. S. (Glos., Cirencester)
Thomson, Sir F.


Gunston, Captain D. W.
Morrison-Bell, Sir Arthur Clive
Todd, Capt. A. J.


Hamilton, Sir George (Ilford)
Muirhead, A. J.
Train, J.


Hammersley, S. S.
Nield, Rt. Hon. Sir Herbert
Turton, Robert Hugh


Hanbury, C.
Oman, Sir Charles William C.
Vaughan-Morgan, Sir Kenyon


Harvey, Major S. E. (Devon, Totnes)
O'Neill, Sir H.
Ward, Lieut.-Col. Sir A. Lambert


Heneage, Lieut.-Colonel Arthur P.
Ormsby-Gore, Rt. Hon. William
Warrender, Sir Victor


Hennessy, Major Sir G. R. J.
Peake, Captain Osbert
Waterhouse, Captain Charles


Hills, Major Rt. Hon. John Waller
Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings)
Wells, Sydney R.


Howard-Bury, Colonel C. K.
Peto, Sir Basil E. (Devon, Barnstaple)
Williams, Charles (Devon, Torquay)


Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hackney, N.)
Power, Sir John Cecil
Wilson, G. H. A. (Cambridge U.)


Iveagh, Countess of
Ramsbotham, H.
Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George


James, Lieut.-Colonel Hon. Cuthbert
Reid, David D. (County Down)
Womersley, W J.


Jones, Sir G. W. H. (Stoke New'gton)
Remer, John R.



King, Commodore Rt. Hon. Henry D.
Rentoul, Sir Gervais S.
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Knox, Sir Alfred
Richardson, Sir P. W. (Sur'y, Ch'ts'y)
Sir George Penny and Captain


Lamb, Sir J. Q.
Roberts, Sir Samuel (Ecclesall)
Wallace.

Question put accordingly, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the proposed Clause."

The Committee divided: Ayes, 288; Noes, 147.

Division No. 184.]
AYES.
[10.51 p.m.


Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife, West)
Cameron, A. G.
Gray, Milner


Adamson, W. M. (Staff., Cannock)
Cape, Thomas
Greenwood, Rt. Hon. A. (Colne)


Addison, Rt. Hon. Dr. Christopher
Carter, W. (St. Pancras, S. W.)
Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)


Aitchison, Rt. Hon. Craigle M.
Charleton, H. C.
Griffith, F. Kingsley (Middlesbro' W.)


Alexander, Rt. Hon. A. V. (Hillsbro')
Chater, Daniel
Griffiths, T. (Monmouth, Pontypool)


Alpass, J. H.
Church, Major A. G.
Groves, Thomas E.


Ammon, Charles George
Clarke, J. S.
Grundy, Thomas W.


Angell, Norman
Cluse, W. S.
Hall, F. (York, W. R., Normanton)


Aske, Sir Robert
Clynes, Rt. Hon. John R.
Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)


Attlee, Clement Richard
Cocks, Frederick Seymour.
Hall, Capt. W. P. (Portsmouth, C.)


Ayles, Walter
Compton, Joseph
Hamilton, Mary Agnes (Blackburn)


Baker, John (Wolverhampton, Bilston)
Daggar, George
Hamilton, Sir R. (Orkney & Zetland)


Baldwin, Oliver (Dudley)
Dallas, George
Hardie, George D.


Barnes, Alfred John
Dalton, Hugh
Hartshorn, Rt. Hon. Vernon


Batey, Joseph
Davies, E. C. (Montgomery)
Hastings, Dr. Somerville


Beckett, John (Camberwell, Peckham)
Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)
Haycock, A. W.


Bellamy, Albert
Day, Harry
Hayday, Arthur


Benn, Rt. Hon. Wedgwood
Denman, Hon. R. D.
Hayes, John Henry


Bennett, Captain E. N. (Cardiff, Central)
Dudgeon, Major C. R.
Henderson, Arthur, Junr. (Cardiff, S.)


Bennett, William (Battersea, South)
Dukes, C.
Henderson, Thomas (Glasgow)


Benson, G.
Duncan, Charles
Henderson, W. W. (Middx., Enfield)


Bentham, Dr. Ethel
Ede, James Chuter
Herriotts, J.


Bevan, Aneurin (Ebbw Vale)
Edmunds, J. E.
Hirst, G. H. (York W. H. Wentworth)


Birkett, W. Norman
Edwards, C. (Monmouth, Bedwellty)
Hoffman, P. C.


Blindell, James
Edwards, E. (Morpeth)
Hollins, A.


Bowen, J. W.
Egan, W. H.
Hopkin, Daniel


Bowerman, Ht. Hon. Charles W
Evans, Capt. Ernest (Welsh Univer.)
Hudson, James H. (Huddersfield)


Broad, Francis Alfred
Foot, Isaac
Hunter, Dr. Joseph


Brockway, A. Fenner
Freeman, Peter
Hutchison, Maj.-Gen. Sir R.


Bromfield, William
Gardner, B. W. (West Ham, Upton)
Isaacs, George


Bromley, J.
George, Major G. Lloyd (Pembroke)
Jenkins, W. (Glamorgan, Neath)


Brooke, W.
Gibbins, Joseph
John, William (Rhondda, West)


Brothers, M.
Gibson, H. M. (Lancs. Mossley)
Johnston, Thomas


Brown, C. W. E. (Notts. Mansfield)
Gill, T. H.
Jones, F. Llewellyn (Flint)


Brown, Ernest (Leith)
Gillett, George M.
Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)


Brown, James (Ayr and Bute)
Glassey, A. E.
Jones, J. J. (West Ham, Silvertown)


Buchanan, G.
Gossling, A. G.
Jones, Rt. Hon. Leif (Camborne)


Burgess, F. G.
Gould, F.
Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)


Burgin, Dr. E. L.
Graham, D. M. (Lanark, Hamilton)
Jones, T. I. Mardy (Pontypridd)


Buxton, C. R. (Yorks. W. R. Elland)
Graham, Rt. Hon. Wm. (Edin., Cent.)
Jowett, Rt. Hon. F. W.


Caine, Derwent Hall-
Granville, E.
Jowitt, Rt. Hon. Sir W. A.


Kedward, R. M. (Kent, Ashford)
Mort, D. L.
Simmons, C. J.


Kelly, W. T.
Moses, J. J. H
Sinclair, Sir A. (Caithness)


Kennedy, Thomas
Mosley, Lady C. (Stoke-on-Trent)
Sinkinson, George


Kinley, J.
Mosley, Sir Oswald (Smethwick)
Smith, Alfred (Sunderland)


Knight, Holford
Muggeridge, H. T.
Smith, Ben (Bermondsey, Rotherhithe)


Lambert, Rt. Hon. George (S. Molton)
Nathan, Major H. L.
Smith, Frank (Nuneaton)


Lang, Gordon
Naylor, T. E.
Smith, H. B. Lees (Keighley)


Lantbury, Rt. Hon. George
Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter)
Smith, Rennie (Penistone)


Lathan, G.
Noel Baker, P. J.
Smith, Tom (Pontefract)


Law, A. (Rossendale)
Oldfield, J. R.
Smith, W. R. (Norwich)


Lawrence, Susan
Oliver, George Harold (Ilkeston)
Snell, Harry


Lawrie, Hugh Hartley (Stalybridge)
Oliver, P. M. (Man., Blackley)
Snowden, Rt. Hon. Philip


Lawson, John James
Owen, Major G. (Carnarvon)
Snowden, Thomas (Accrington)


Lawther, W. (Barnard Castle)
Palin, John Henry.
Sorensen, R.


Leach, W.
Palmer, E. T.
Stamford, Thomas W.


Lee, Frank (Derby, N. E.)
Parkinson, John Allen (Wigan)
Stephen, Campbell


Lee, Jennie (Lanark, Northern)
Perry, S. F.
Stewart, W. J. (Belfast, South)


Lees, J.
Pethick-Lawrence, F. W.
Strachey, E. J. St. Loe


Lewis, T. (Southampton)
Phillips, Dr. Marion
Strauss, G. R.


Lloyd, C. Ellis
Picton-Turbervill, Edith
Sullivan, J.


Longbottom, A. W.
Potts, John S.
Sutton, J. E.


Longden, F.
Price, M. P.
Taylor R. A. (Lincoln)


Lowth, Thomas
Pybus, Percy John
Taylor, W. B. (Norfolk, S. W.)


Lunn, William
Quibell, D. J. K.
Thomas, Rt. Hon. J. H. (Derby)


Macdonald, Gordon (Ince)
Ramsay, T. B. Wilson
Thurtle, Ernest


MacDonald, Rt. Hon. J. R. (Seaham)
Rathbone, Eleanor
Tillett, Ben


Macdonald, Sir M. (Inverness)
Raynes, W. R.
Tinker, John Joseph


McElwee, A.
Richards, R.
Tout, W. J.


McEntee, V. L.
Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)
Townend, A. E.


McKinlay, A.
Riley, Ben (Dewsbury)
Trevelyan, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles


MacLaren, Andrew
Riley, F. F. (Stockton-on-Tees)
Turner, B.


Maclean, Sir Donald (Cornwall, N.)
Ritson, J.
Vaughan, D. J.


Maclean, Neil (Glasgow, Govan)
Roberts, Rt. Hon. F. O. (W. Bromwich)
Viant, S. P.


MacNeill-Weir, L.
Romeril, H. G.
Walker, J.


McShane, John James
Rosbotham, D. S. T.
Wallace, H. W.


Malone, C. L'Estrange (N'thampton)
Rothschild, J. de
Watkins, F. C.


Mander, Geoffrey le M.
Rowson, Guy
Watson, W. M. (Dunfermline)


Mansfield, W.
Russell, Richard John (Eddisbury)
Wellock, Wilfred


March, S.
Salter, Dr. Alfred
Welsh, James (Paisley)


Marcus, M.
Samuel, Rt. Hon. Sir H. (Darwen)
Welsh, James C. (Coatbridge)


Markham, S. F.
Samuel, H. W. (Swansea, West)
West, F. R.


Marley, J.
Sanders, W. S.
Westwood, Joseph


Marshall, Fred
Sandham, E.
Whiteley, Wilfrid (Birm., Ladywood)


Mathers, George
Sawyer, G. F.
Wilkinson, Ellen C.


Maxton, James
Scott, James
Williams, David (Swansea, East)


Melville, Sir James
Scurr, John
Williams, Dr. J. H. (Llanelly)


Messer, Fred
Sexton, James
Williams, T. (York. Don Valley)


Millar, J. D.
Shakespeare, Geoffrey H.
Wilson, C. H. (Sheffield. Attercliffe)


Mills, J. E.
Shaw, Rt. Hon. Thomas (Preston)
Wilson, R. J. (Jarrow)


Milner, J.
Shepherd, Arthur Lewis
Winterton, G. E. (Leicester, Loughb'gh)


Montague, Frederick
Sherwood, G. H.
Wise, E. F.


Morgan, Dr. H. B.
Shield, George William
Wright, W. (Rutherglen)


Morley, Ralph
Shiels, Dr. Drummond
Young, R. S. (Islington, North)


Morris-Jones, Dr. J. H, (Denbigh)
Shillaker, J. F.



Morrison, Herbert (Hackney, South)
Shinwell, E.
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Morrison, Robert C. (Tottenham, N.)
Short, Alfred (Wednesbury)
Mr. Paling and Mr. Whiteley.


NOES.


Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel
Butler, R. A.
Falle, Sir Bertram G.


Albery, Irving James
Cadogan, Major Hon. Edward
Ferguson, Sir John


Allen, W. E. D. (Belfast, W.)
Carver, Major W. H.
Fielden, E. B.


Ashley, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Wilfrid W.
Castle Stewart, Earl of
Fison, F. G. Clavering


Astor, Maj. Hn. John J. (Kent, Dover)
Cautley, Sir Henry S.
Ford, Sir P. J.


Baldwin, Rt. Hon. Stanley (Bewdley)
Cayzer, Maj. Sir Herbt, R. (Prtsmth, S.)
Forestier-Walker, Sir L.


Balfour, George (Hampstead)
Christie, J. A.
Fremantle, Lieut.-Colonel Francis E.


Balfour, Captain H. H. (I. of Thanet)
Colman, N. C. D.
Ganzoni, Sir John


Balniel, Lord
Colville, Major D. J.
Gault, Lieut.-Col. Andrew Hamilton


Beamish, Rear-Admiral T. P. H.
Courtauld, Major J. S.
Gibson, C. G. (Pudsey & Otley)


Beaumont, M. W.
Courthope, Colonel Sir G. L.
Glyn, Major R. G. C.


Berry, Sir George
Crichton-Stuart, Lord C.
Gower, Sir Robert


Bevan, S. J. (Holborn)
Crookshank, Cpt. H. (Lindsey, Gainsbro)
Graham, Fergus (Cumberland, N.)


Birchall, Major Sir John Dearman
Croom-Johnson, R. P.
Greene, W. P. Crawford


Bird, Ernest Roy
Culverwell, C. T. (Bristol, West)
Gretton, Colonel Rt. Hon. John


Boothby, R. J. G.
Cunliffe-Lister, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip
Gritten, W. G. Howard


Bourne, Captain Robert Croft
Dairymple-White, Lt.-Col. Sir Godfrey
Gunston, Captain D. W.


Bowyer, Captain Sir George E. W
Davidson, Rt. Hon. J. (Hertford)
Hamilton, Sir George (Ilford)


Boyce, H. L.
Davidson, Major-General Sir J. H.
Hammersley, S. S.


Bracken, B.
Davies, Dr. Vernon
Hanbury, C.


Braithwaite, Major A. N.
Davies, Maj. Geo. F. (Somerset, Yeovil)
Harvey, Major S. E. (Devon, Totnes)


Brass, Captain Sir William
Dixey, A. C.
Heneage, Lieut.-Colonel Arthur P.


Briscoe, Richard George
Dugdale, Capt. T. L.
Hennessy, Major Sir G. R. J.


Brown, Col. D. C. (N'th'l'd., Hexham)
Edmondson, Major A. J.
Hills, Major Rt. Hon. John Waller


Brown, Brig.-Gen. H. C. (Berks, Newb'y)
Erskine, Lord (Somerset, Weston-s.-M.)
Howard-Bury, Colonel C. K.




Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hackney, N.)
Muirhead, A. J.
Smith, R. W. (Aberd'n & Kinc'dine, C.)


Iveagh, Countess of
Nield, Rt. Hon. Sir Herbert
Smith-Carington, Neville W.


Jones, Sir G. W. H. (Stoke New'gton)
Oman, Sir Charles William C.
Smithers, Waldron


King, Commodore Rt. Hon. Henry D.
O'Neill, Sir H.
Somerset, Thomas


Knox, Sir Alfred
Ormsby-Gore, Rt. Hon. William
Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)


Lamb, Sir J. Q.
Peake, Captain Osbert
Somerville, D. G. (Willesden, East)


Lane Fox, Col. Rt. Hon. George R.
Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings)
Southby, Commander A. R. J.


Law, Sir Alfred (Derby, High Peak)
Peto, Sir Basil E, (Devon, Barnstaple)
Steel-Maitland, Rt. Hon. Sir Arthur


Leighton, Major B. E. P.
Power, Sir John Cecil
Thomson, Sir F.


Llewellin, Major J. J.
Ramsbotham, H.
Todd, Capt. A. J.


Long, Major Eric
Reid, David D. (County Down)
Train, J.


Lymington, Viscount
Remer, John R.
Turton, Robert Hugh


McConnell, Sir Joseph
Rentoul, Sir Gervais S.
Vaughan-Morgan, Sir Kenyon


MacRobert, Rt. Hon. Alexander M.
Richardson, Sir P. W. (Sur'y, Ch'ts'y)
Ward, Lieut.-Col. Sir A. Lambert


Maitland, A. (Kent, Faversham)
Roberts, Sir Samuel (Ecclesall)
Warrender, Sir Victor


Makins, Brigadier-General E.
Rodd, Rt. Hon. Sir James Renneil
Waterhouse, Captain Charles


Margesson, Captain H. D.
Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)
Wells, Sydney R.


Mason, Colonel Glyn K.
Salmon, Major I.
Williams, Com. C. (Devon, Torquay)


Meller R. J.
Samuel, Samuel (W'dsworth, Putney)
Wilson, G. H. A. (Cambridge U.)


Merriman, Sir F. Boyd
Sandeman, Sir N. Stewart
Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George


Mond, Hon. Henry
Savery, S. S.
Wolmer, Rt. Hon. Viscount


Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. Sir B.
Simms, Major-General J.
Womersley, W. J.


Moore, Sir Newton J. (Richmond)
Sinclair, Col. T. (Queen's U., Belfst)



Morrison, W. S. (Glos., Cirencester)
Skelton, A. N.
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Morrison-Bell, Sir Arthur Clive
Smith, Louis W. (Sheffield, Hallam)
Sir George Penny and Captain




Wallace


Question, "That this House doth agree with the Committee in the said Resolution," put, and agreed to.

It being after Eleven of the Clock, the CHAIRMAN left the Chair to make his Report to the House.

Committee report Progress; to sit again To-morrow.

Orders of the Day — ROAD TRAFFIC [MONEY].

Resolution reported,
That, for the purpose of any Act of the present Session to make provision for the regulation of traffic on roads, and of motor vehicles and otherwise with respect to roads and vehicles thereon, to make provision for the protection of third parties against risks' arising out of the use of motor vehicles, and in connection with such protection to amend the Assurance Companies Act, 1909, and for other purposes connected with the matters aforesaid, it is expedient to authorise—

(a) the payment in every year out of moneys provided by Parliament of such sums as the Minister may, with the consent of the Treasury, direct in respect of the salaries, remuneration, establishment charges, and other expenses of the traffic commissioners, certifying officers, public service vehicle examiners, and any other officers or servants appointed by the Minister for the purpose of Part IV of the said Act, including any expenses incurred in connection with the employment of police officers as public service vehicle examiners; and
(b) the payment into the Exchequer of all fines imposed by courts of summary jurisdiction in respect of offences under the said Act, or the regulations made under the said Act, and of all sums received by the councils of counties and county boroughs by way of fees for licences under Part I of the said Act; and
2210
(c) any sums so paid into the Exchequer to be charged on and issued out of the Consolidated Fund as if they had been paid into the Exchequer under the Roads Act, 1920."

Motion made, and Question proposed, "That this House doth agree with the Committee in the said Resolution."

Colonel ASHLEY: It will be within the recollection of the House that when we discussed this Motion in Committee certain questions were put to the Minister of Transport which he was unable to answer very definitely, probably because he had not had sufficient notice. I want to ask whether he can give us more information now that he has had three or four days in which to consider these rather important details. Has he come to any conclusion as to the kind of persons he will approach with a view to their becoming chairmen of these traffic commissioners, and what sort of salary he expects to be able to offer? I would impress upon the hon. Gentleman that it is necessary to be very careful in the selection of these chairmen, because on their tact, business knowledge and general common sense will depend very largely the success or failure of these commissioners, the appointment of whom I strongly support.
I would also like to know what the proposal is as to the appointment of certifying officers and public service vehicle examiners. He seemed to think on the Committee stage that that certifying officers would be part-time officers and the examiners whole-time officers. I suggest that that idea is not very sound from a business point of view, and that
the certifying officers, who have to examine every one of the public service vehicles which will come on to the road and certify that they are fit to carry passengers should really give their whole time to the work. It is important that they should be properly qualified men and able to devote their whole time to the examination of those vehicles. That is the public service vehicles.
There was one point which was not raised and which I think ought to be made clear. How does the right hon. Gentleman intend to secure the services of police officers as public service vehicle examiners? In the Bill, it is laid down that the Minister may secure the services of police officers as public vehicle examiners, but I would like to know how he is going to approach the Chief Constables? Are they to devote all their time to this work, are they to be directing traffic in the morning and examining vehicles in the afternoon? Are they, to use an Army phrase, to be seconded for a time for this work, and then go back to their other duties? Before we allow this Resolution to go through, we should be told exactly what are to be the duties of these police officers, because it is certainly an innovation to use police in this direction.

The MINISTER of TRANSPORT (Mr. Herbert Morrison): I rather thought that we should not have to consider the provisions of the Bill itself upon this Resolution, or go into details on the points which were raised in Committee by the right hon. and gallant Gentleman the Member for New Forest (Colonel Ashley). Certainly, it is my great anxiety to give the House every piece of information that I possibly can, but, as I informed the Committee, my difficulty is one with which any other Minister would have been confronted in my position, and it is that the Bill is not yet passed, and we cannot tell between now and the final passage of the Bill exactly what provisions will be incorporated in the Measure restricting the duties of the officers who have been mentioned, giving them additional duties, or transforming their character. All sorts of changes are possible during the Committee stage and the Report stage of this Measure either on the initiative of the Government or of
hon. Members. We have not yet come to anything like final conclusions as to the type of person we shall appoint as traffic commissioners, nor have we come to any final conclusions as to the certifying officers or the examining officers. I am concerned that they should have certain qualifications and characteristics.
The Chairman of the Commission does require, ideally, a whole series of good qualities. He ought to have business ability, and be able to see the problems facing the business community and the road transport industry. He ought to have an administrative sense, that is to say, he ought to be able to control the machine of administration so that it will run with smoothness and efficiency. He ought to be impartial, he ought to be able to weigh the evidence that is argued before the Traffic Commission. Generally speaking, he ought to have a good sense of fairness and justice as between one party and another. It may be said that people who have been in the municipal service, or the police service, or the transport world, are suited for that position, but directly I committed myself to that point objection would be raised that this municipal officer would not be suitable, or that police officer would not be suitable, or this business man would not be suitable, and, clearly, I must, when applications are received, when it is known that the appointments are to be made, endeavour to pick out the men who answer the qualifications I have indicated.
With regard to salary, again it would be premature to say what the salary will be. Clearly it must depend on the responsibilities which these gentlemen will have to carry. I cannot say what the responsibilities will be until we get the final passage of the Bill. With regard to certifying officers and the public service vehicles examining officers, it is possible that I may have been in error in giving the answer on the Committee stage as to whether they are part-time or full-time officers, and which the one and which the other. My prejudice, my instinct, is for full-time services in both cases, in order that one may have them more or less under continuous control and get the necessary type of technical qualification which must be an important factor; and particularly important
in the case of the certifying officer who will discharge very great responsibilities indeed.
I am concerned to secure in both cases that they are men who are technically qualified for the work that they have to do. Certifying officers must be men of technical and professional experience. Examining officers must be men fully competent to discharge their duties, but it may be in the case of the examining officer that one can recruit for the service not necessarily men of the Institute of Civil Engineers or men of that type, but perhaps first-class mechanics with considerable practical experience of motor construction and repair work, could be considered for those duties. But subject to this reservation, one must wait for finality before one sees the definite duties of these persons as provided by the Bill. With regard to the police officers there is a permissive power as to examining officers, that, with the concurrence of the local police authority, the Minister may appoint police officers as examining officers. I do not imagine that all the examining officers or even the majority of them will be police officers. I only take this power because in some cases the local authorities have done their licensing duties so well and the police have been so efficient in their work, and we ought all to recognise that fact, although we are transferring their powers to someone else. As a matter of administrative continuity and sound administration, I may be very glad, or the Minister of the time may be very glad, to avail himself of the services of police officers, who are eminently suited for this class of duty. All I do is to take the power to use them if I desire. But I cannot say whether I all use them or not, nor whether the police authorities would be willing that I should use these police officers.
I do not imagine that the arrangement will be that the Minister of Transport will individually engage a series of police officers. Obviously, they must remain in the police force, and must be subject to police discipline and to the orders of the chief of police of the district in which they serve. If any arrangement of that kind is made, it must be made, in my judgment, between the Minister of Transport and the local police authority, and he must make, so to speak, a contract for
the service of certain officers of the police force, in return for certain considerations which the Minister of Transport will give to the police authority. That is the kind of arrangement which we shall make.
I think that I have dealt with the points made by the right hon. Gentleman. I say, again, that I am sorry that I cannot be more definite, but I think that the House in all quarters will see that it would be foolish of me to come to final conclusions or to make any definite administrative decisions until we see exactly the form that the Bill is going to take, and exactly the powers that I shall have to exercise under the Bill. I am, however, determined to secure the most efficient administration and the best brains: that I can for the work, in order that it may be carried on with smoothness and cleanness, absolutely free from corruption or any improper influence in the granting or refusal of licences, and with the greatest efficiency. I think the House will agree that that is as far as I can go in explanation at this stage, and I hope that the House will now be good enough to give me the Report stage of the Resolution.

Mr. CHARLES WILLIAMS: I think everyone will agree with the last part of the Minister's statement, namely, that the administration of the various branches of this Measure should be as good as possible and absolutely clean. If the Minister follows the example of his predecessor, it will be a very good example. I must say, however, that, as a financial statement dealing with a great Bill, the statement which the Minister has just made is probably one of the crudest that has ever been made in the House of Commons. The Minister said, in reference to almost every subject, that he had not very much idea as to what was going to be done. He told us that, so far as money was concerned, when the Committee stage was reached, he expected that there might be very large changes, and that those changes might follow into the Report and further stages of the Bill. It has always seemed to me to be a sound axiom of finance in this House that, when we are dealing with Resolutions on Report, we should have some sort of idea as to where we stand, and for the Minister to say that he has no idea is surely directly sinning against the best interests of the House at
large. Could not the Minister give us some idea of the actual total of traffic commissioners, certifying officers and so on who will come under the Bill? If he could we should be rather more inclined to give him the Report stage of the Resolutions. I feel sure every section of the House would wish to join in the great and highly deserved compliment which the hon. Gentleman paid to the police authorities throughout the country but we ought to be told, within a reasonable figure, the actual totals of these people who are to be engaged.

The remaining Orders were read, and postponed.

Orders of the Day — ADJOURNMENT.

Resolved, "That this House do now adjourn."—[Mr. Parkinson.]

Adjourned accordingly at Twenty-one minutes after Eleven o'clock.